Document 2018769

Stockholm University
The Department of Journalism, Media and Communication (JMK)
Media and Communication Studies
YEH, MON. NO PROBLEM.
- An ethnographic study of risk communication and social trust in Jamaica
Author: Fanny Hellsing
Advisor: Kristina Riegert
Master thesis, H09 M Master
June 2011
Abstract
Title
Yeh, mon. No problem.
An ethnographic study of risk communication and social trust in Jamaica.
Author
Fanny Hellsing
Advisor
Kristina Riegert
Level
Master thesis in media and communication studies
Institution Department of Journalism, Media and Communication, Stockholm University
The aim of this study is to examine the impact of social trust in public risk communication in
St Elizabeth, Jamaica. From a cultural rationality approach is social trust assumed to affect the
public’s risk perceptions and consequently their risk behavior when it comes to natural
disasters. Hence, social trust is assumed to have an effect of how the citizenry of Jamaica
perceives public risk communication. The risk communication carried out by the local
authorities (St Elizabeth Parish Council) is examined through participant observations and
expert interviews. Furthermore, twelve citizens are interviewed to examine their risk
perceptions, risk behavior and their perception of the public risk communication in St
Elizabeth.
All twelve respondents express a low level of social trust in the local authorities. Instead
they express a great trust in media to provide them with necessary short-term risk information
(crisis communication). As a result of this, the respondents have little knowledge about longterm disaster preparedness. Findings in the present study can confirm that the level of social
trust is affecting which communication channels the public chooses to utilize for risk
communication. Therefore social trust is an important factor to have in mind when examining
any risk communication. Also, the present study challenges previous studies emphasizing that
dialogue is a requirement for building social trust in risk communication.
Acknowledgments
I would like to express my gratitude to all of those who have helped me with this study.
Thank you Shane Taylor, Renée Bradford-Britton, Dramaine Jones and Chandia Walters for
making my work at St Elizabeth Parish Council such a wonderful experience. I must also
acknowledge the volunteers at St Elizabeth Parish Council; Judith Sommer, Brody Paul,
Sabrina Burin-Møller and Erin Fyfe. Thank you all for a terrific performance at work – and
memorable nights at the Waterloo Guesthouse.
I also thank you Stacy-Ann Barrett and Bridgette Barrett-Williams at Project’s Abroad
Jamaica. Thank you Stacy for introducing me to respondents and calling just to hear
everything is going well with the study. I have felt your sincere support from the very first
day we met in Black River.
I very special thanks goes to my host family; Mitzie Smith and the adorable noisemakers
Yohan and Ajani Samuels. My appreciation also goes to Juliette Johnson. Miss Julie, I am so
grateful for our conversations when I came home from work. Thank you for your insightful
thoughts about the Jamaican society – and thank you for making me feel privileged everyday,
having the opportunity to study at the university.
I recognize this study would not have been possible without financial support from
Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (SIDA), the International
Programme Office and Stiftelsen Folke Bernadottes Minnesfond.
Last but not least, I would like to thank my respondents for sharing ideas and beliefs with
me. My thesis is for you – and Jamaica, land we love!
Table of Contents
1.
INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................................................... 1
2.
BACKGROUND ......................................................................................................................................... 2
2.1.
JAMAICA ......................................................................................................................................................................2
2.2.
SAINT
ELIZABETH
PARISH ......................................................................................................................................3
2.3.
NATURAL
DISASTERS
IN
ST
ELIZABETH ...............................................................................................................4
2.4.
RISK
COMMUNICATION
AND
CRISIS
COMMUNICATION .......................................................................................4
2.5.
THE
STRUCTURE
OF
PUBLIC
RISK
COMMUNICATION
IN
JAMAICA.....................................................................5
3.
THEORY..................................................................................................................................................... 6
3.1.
RISK
COMMUNICATION ............................................................................................................................................6
3.2.
THE
CULTURAL
RATIONALITY
APPROACH
AND
SYMBOLIC
INTERACTIONISM ................................................7
3.3.
A
MODEL
FOR
RISK
COMMUNICATION ...................................................................................................................8
3.4.
SOCIAL
TRUST
IN
RISK
COMMUNICATION .............................................................................................................8
3.5.
PREVIOUS
STUDIES
OF
SOCIAL
TRUST
IN
RISK
COMMUNICATION ................................................................. 10
3.6.
KNOWLEDGE
GAP .................................................................................................................................................. 12
4.
AIM
AND
RESEARCH
QUESTIONS....................................................................................................13
4.1.
LIMITATIONS
OF
THE
STUDY................................................................................................................................ 13
5.
METHODS ...............................................................................................................................................14
5.1.
PARTICIPANT
OBSERVATIONS ............................................................................................................................. 14
5.2.
QUALITATIVE
INTERVIEWS .................................................................................................................................. 15
5.3.
VALIDITY ................................................................................................................................................................. 16
6.
THE
FINDINGS .......................................................................................................................................18
6.1.
RISK
COMMUNICATION
AT
ST
ELIZABETH
PARISH
COUNCIL ........................................................................ 18
6.2.
DISASTER
PREPAREDNESS
AMONG
THE
RESPONDENTS ................................................................................. 22
7.
DISCUSSION
OF
THE
FINDINGS........................................................................................................31
7.1.
SOCIAL
TRUST
IN
THE
JAMAICAN
COMMUNICATION
TRIANGLE .................................................................... 31
7.2.
SOCIAL
TRUST
AFFECTING
THE
RESPONDENTS’
DISASTER
PREPAREDNESS................................................ 37
7.3.
NOT
AN
EQUILATERAL
COMMUNICATION
TRIANGLE ...................................................................................... 39
8.
IMPLICATIONS
FOR
INCREASING
SOCIAL
TRUST
IN
THE
LOCAL
AUTHORITIES ............40
9.
FINAL
CHAPTER ...................................................................................................................................43
9.1.
CONCLUDING
REMARKS ........................................................................................................................................ 43
9.2.
DRAWBACKS
OF
THE
APPLIED
METHOD ............................................................................................................ 45
9.3.
IMPLICATIONS
FOR
FURTHER
RESEARCH .......................................................................................................... 46
10.
REFERENCES..........................................................................................................................................48
11.
APPENDIX
1
–
RESPONDENTS
IN
THE
ETHNOGRAPHIC
INTERVIEWS...............................55
12.
APPENDIX
2
–
GUIDE
FOR
THE
EXPERT
INTERVIEWS ............................................................56
13.
APPENDIX
3
–
GUIDE
FOR
THE
ETHNOGRAPHIC
INTERVIEWS ............................................57
Yeh, mon. No problem
Fanny Hellsing
Stockholm University
1. Introduction
“Me have been living in the house for thirty years now. Last year, the floods
came. Mud and water everywhere. Me had the papers in the living room, but
now they are all gone. All the documents confirming my property registration
are gone. Me cannot afford to pay the property taxes, and so someone else did it
for me. This person now claims the house is his. Without property taxes or the
documents me cannot prove the house is mine. They floods took it, and now me
risk losing the house. What can me do?”
An old lady told me this story at a public event in Jamaica a few months ago. I was working
as a volunteer at the St Elizabeth Parish Council at an event to encourage registration of
property in the parish of St Elizabeth. The answer to the ladies request is that nothing can be
done. Without the documents, she cannot claim the house is hers. After someone has paid the
property taxes for twelve years, the property will be his or her – unless someone else can
claim to be the owner by showing a property registration.
Jamaica is the third most exposed country when it comes to multiple natural disasters
(United Nations, 2007:1). Hurricanes, flooding, landslides, earthquakes and tornados are just
some examples of events threatening to cause human and economical harm in this Caribbean
island. The old lady in Black River risked losing her house because her property registration
had been destroyed in a natural disaster. Knowledge and disaster preparedness would not have
stopped the flooding, but copies of the valuable documents would have mitigated the
consequences of it.
Members in a democracy have the right to access information important to their lives
(United Nations, 1999). The Jamaican authorities are well aware of this human right and law
has regulated public risk education since 1969. Present study will, from the intended
receivers’ perspective (namely the public), examine how this public risk communication is
carried out in Jamaica. Who is involved in the public risk communication? And whom does
the public entrust to provide them with risk information when a natural disaster appears?
1
Yeh, mon. No problem
Fanny Hellsing
Stockholm University
2. Background
2.1. Jamaica
Jamaica is an island nation located in the Caribbean Sea. Christopher Columbus claimed the
island to Spain when he arrived in 1494. In 1655 British forces claimed Jamaica to belong to
them and the island became a British colony for more than three hundred years. The majority
of today’s population are relatives of the African slaves who were brought to Jamaica to work
in the sugar plantations.
Jamaica was declared independent from the United Kingdom in 1962. The economic
growth rates increased the first decade of independence, but economic inequalities in urban
and rural areas caused political controversies. In the 1980’s Jamaica suffered from an
economical depression and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) offered economic support.
However, Jamaica’s economical depression has continued up until this day (Planning Institute
of Jamaica, 2009:XIX). Today United Nations ranks Jamaica a high human developing
country (United Nations, 2010:146). This would mean that the public has a low level of
material well-being and the country have severe economical and sociopolitical issues to solve
before becoming a developed country (United Nations, 2010:146).
Jamaica’s political and financial instability is complex. The present study addresses one
aspect of Jamaica’s economical challenges, namely natural disasters. Tropical storms, floods,
torrential rain, coastal erosions and landslides are just some examples of natural disasters
causing Jamaica trouble every year. There is no available data of total costs for Jamaica’s
reconstruction after natural disasters, but costs of isolated disasters indicate it is a significant
amount; in 2004 hurricane Ivan caused damages to an estimated amount of $360 million
(Stewart, 2005:7; United Nations, 2007:61; Planning Institute of Jamaica, 2009:245). This
amount represent 3.2 percent of Jamaica’s GDP that year (United Nations, 2007:61; Planning
Institute of Jamaica, 2009:245).
2
Yeh, mon. No problem
Fanny Hellsing
Stockholm University
2.2. Saint Elizabeth Parish
Jamaica is a democracy in terms of free elections of the prime minister every fifth year. Free
elections are also held for the parliament, though two political parties are dominant and other
parties therefore have difficulties to achieve electoral success. The country is divided into
thirteen administrative parishes. In charge of the parishes are local governments called parish
councils. The present study will take place in one of these parishes, namely St Elizabeth.
St Elizabeth is located in southern Jamaica and is by size one of the largest parishes. It is
a rural area with approximately 150,000 inhabitants (United Nations, 2007:11).
Approximately 5,700 of those live in the parish capital, Black River (Lowe, 2009:7). The St
Elizabeth Parish Council, headquarters of fire brigade and -police, and the only hospital in the
parish are all located to central Black River.
Map of Jamaica and St Elizabeth Parish. (Source: St Elizabeth Parish Council 110323).
3
2.3. Natural disasters in St Elizabeth
Yeh, mon. No problem
Fanny Hellsing
Stockholm University
The topography in St Elizabeth varies. The northeastern communities are located in the Santa
Cruz Mountains. Due to few natural water resources, the region is vulnerable to droughts in
the winter. When the bushes whiter, the torrential rains causes landslides in the springtime.
This circuit of natural disasters during the year is defined as multiple natural disasters (United
Nations, 2007:36f).
The southwestern communities in the parish host Jamaica’s largest morass. With the sea
and morass close at hand, the area is exposed to flooding, storm surges and coastal erosions.
(United Nations, 2007:18; Planning Institute of Jamaica, 2009:247).
The official hurricane season lasts from June to November every year (United Nations,
2007:23). Hurricanes are not reported annually, but they appear about every fifth year (Isaacs,
2008:21; National Hurricane Center, 2011). Still, tropical depressions and tropical storms are
reported to cause significant harm across Jamaica several times a year (United Nations
2007:10). In addition the seasonal natural hazards are earthquakes, tsunamis and tornados
constant threats in Jamaica (St Elizabeth Disaster Committee, 1999:1).
Secondary effects of natural disasters can be as harmful as the disaster itself. Except the
economical damages of natural disasters are fire and human diseases a concern in Jamaica.
The groundwater can be contaminated and cause epidemics of cholera. The humid climate in
the hurricane season can also cause epidemics of the mosquito-borne diseases dengue fever
and malaria. (Planning Institute of Jamaica, 2009:246; ODPEM, 1997:13).
2.4. Risk communication and crisis communication
Response to natural disasters can be defined by two phases. The authorities have to carry out
emergency management when a natural disaster becomes an immediate risk. Typical actions
in emergency management are providing food supplies and open emergency shelters in public
schools. A next step in emergency management is often to reconstruct infrastructure and to
assist the public by replacing crops and rebuild houses. The local authorities, i.e. the parish
councils, operate all these actions.
Because Jamaica is exposed to numerous of natural disasters every year the parish
councils operate emergency management on a regular basis. To reduce the human and
economical consequences of natural disasters, the parish councils also carry out risk
communication. This risk communication can be referred to as disaster preparedness. The
4
Yeh, mon. No problem
Fanny Hellsing
Stockholm University
purpose of risk communication can be either short-term or long-term disaster preparedness.
With short-term risk communication, the parish council wants to notify the public a natural
disaster has been identified. At this point the public has to be updated about as for example
available emergency shelters and if specific roads are blocked. The purpose of long-term
disaster preparedness is to change the public’s risk behavior by changing their general
perception of risks. Long-term risk communication is often referred to as public education
and addresses things such as what natural disasters Jamaica are exposed to, how to build a
safe house, where it is appropriate to settle down and how safe drinking water is prepared.
For practical reasons, short-term and long-term risk communication in the present study
will be distinguished by addressing them as crisis communication (short-term information)
and risk communication (long-term information/public education). This use of the terms is
complicated as risk communication often is often used synonymously with crisis
communication or risk management. Hence, following discussion is a clarification of how it
can be defined. Gunilla Jarlbro (1993) clearly distinguishes risk communication from crisis
communication. To understand her classification, Roland Nordlund (2000:127) categorize
risks as latent-, possible-, or immediate risks. Latent risks are things such as the green house
effect or the risk of war. These events may very well be a risk, but the public does not
consider them as one every day. Possible risks are statistically more likely to harm the public,
and people need to become aware of the risk to make an individual risk assessment. A typical
possible risk in Jamaica would be natural disasters. As soon as possible risks occur, they will
become an immediate risk (Nordlund, 2000:127f). What in this study is defined as risk
communication, addresses any latent- and possible risks. Thus, communication addressing
immediate risks will be referred to as crisis communication.
2.5. The structure of public risk communication in Jamaica
Jamaican authorities have since 1969 a liability to carry out disaster preparedness and
emergency management (St Elizabeth Disaster Committee, 1999:3). The national agency
Office of Disaster Preparedness and Emergency Management (ODPEM) was founded as a
direct consequence of flooding in 1979. Ever since, ODPEM has established national disaster
action plans. Every parish council is required to have a Parish Disaster Preparedness Office
and a Parish Disaster Coordinator (PDC), but ODPEM will assist those in case of major
natural disasters. (United Nations, 2007:47).
5
Yeh, mon. No problem
Fanny Hellsing
Stockholm University
The Jamaican parliament implemented the Local Government Reform Act in 2001. The
purpose with the reform is to strengthen local governance in disaster preparedness and
emergency management; to have the executive political power near the people, and by this
encourage civil commitment in public matters (Powell & Lewis, 2008:86). The reform has
increased the Parish Disaster Preparedness Office’s liability in disaster management. Today,
the parish councils alone are responsible for establishing local emergency routines and to
carry out public education concerning natural disasters (ODPEM, 1997:19f).
When in this study refers to public risk communication, it is not only risk communication
carried out by the political institutions. Instead, public risk communication is any risk
communication or crisis communication directed to the Jamaican population. This means that
any social or political institution can carry out public risk communication, no matter if they
are authorized by the government (i.e. have political power) to carry out risk communication.
3. Theory
3.1. Risk communication
Risk communication can be defined as ‘any public or private communication that informs
individuals about the existence, nature, form, severity or acceptability of risks’ (Krimsky &
Plough, 1987:6). The purpose of risk communication is public education, but it is also a
process for the sender to improve its ‘understanding of public values and concerns’ and ‘to
increase mutual trust and credibility’ (Keeney & von Winterfeldt, 1986:420f).
Lars-Erik Warg (2000) distinguishes risk communication from risk information. The
purpose of risk information is to transfer a message from the sender to a receiver, whereas
risk communication implies an information exchange in both directions (Warg, 2000:50f).
The outcome of risk communication is more developed than risk information; risk
communication aims at creating a population with an ability to make independent decisions
related to latent- at possible risks (Warg, 2000:51). The Local Reform Act (2001) and the
Parish Disaster Committee (1999) suggest the Parish Disaster Preparedness Offices to carry
out risk communication. With this in mind, the following chapter introduces a theoretical
framework for studies examining risk communication, not risk information.
6
3.2. The cultural rationality approach and symbolic interactionism
Yeh, mon. No problem
Fanny Hellsing
Stockholm University
Two separate traditions have emerged in the research field of risk communication. Sheldon
Krimsky and Alonzo Plough (1987) refer to these traditions as technical- versus cultural
rationality approach. The technical rationality approach focuses on objectivity and how well
the sender manages to distribute technical evidence to a receiver (Krimsky & Plough,
1987:5). The cultural rationality approach has an audience perspective where social factors
and perceptions of risk are examined (Krimsky & Plough, 1987:5 Rowan, 1991:303; Cox,
2010:205; Grabill & Simmons, 1998:415; Burns, 2000:43). A cultural rationality approach is
considered suitable for the present study since the purpose is to examine public risk
communication from the intended receiver’s perspective.
The cultural rationality approach emerges from the belief that risk is a construction
affected by social and cultural factors. Sometimes the approach also can be referred to as the
social amplification theory (Kasperson, 1992:157f). The perspective is characterized by the
need for social, cultural, psychological and communication theories to examine risk
communication (Kasperson, 1992:157). The approach was established in 1982 when Mary
Douglas and Aaron Wildavsky presented the group- and grid analysis (Breck, 2002:43).
Douglas and Wildavsky (1982:138) argue that every society can be understood by examining
social distinctions between communities (groups), and social values within a community
(grids). Risk is then a social construction with the purpose of maintaining and controlling the
grid (Douglas & Wildavsky, 1982:138). Today Douglas’ and Wildavsky’s argument of risk as
a social construction without any connection to ‘real risk’ is widely accepted among scholars
(Breck, 2002:52f).1
The concept of ‘perceived risk’ originates from the notion of symbolic interactionism.
Symbolic interactionism is widely used in many research fields and can therefore have a
slightly different meaning. The cultural rationality approach defines symbolic interactionism
as the founder Herbert Blumer put it; ‘individuals act and react towards things on the basis of
meaning they ascribe the phenomenon’ (Blumer, 1969:2). Thoughts and perceptions are
followed by actions, i.e. ‘real’ consequences in terms of risk behavior. Therefore risk
perceptions, and how risk communication is affecting the perceptions, become essential in the
cultural rationality approach.
1
The German Sociologist Ulrich Beck and his concept of ‘risk society’ (1992) are to be seen as influential when
discussing social construction of risk. Yet, Beck has not been introduced in the present study since his research
does not address risks as in natural disasters, but rather risk perceptions constructed within a grid.
7
3.3. A model for risk communication
Yeh, mon. No problem
Fanny Hellsing
Stockholm University
Nordlund (2000) describes risk communication in a quite simple communication model. The
process can be illustrated with a ‘communication triangle’ where the sender, communication
channel and receiver are interrelated:
Nordlund’s communication triangle. Source: Nordlund (2000:125).
In Jamaican risk communication this model would illustrate risk information distributed by
the Parish Disaster Coordinator (the sender), to the population in St Elizabeth (receivers).
Sometimes the message passes through media, who then become the communicator. The
communication triangle is a normative communication model with the purpose to illustrate
risk communication in a democracy (Nordlund, 2000:125). Nordlund (2000:125f) lists two
criteria to have a well-functioning triangle:
a) The triangle must remain equilateral no matter external factors. This would mean that
the actors recognize and respect their roles in the communication. E.g. the
communicator is the mediator of the message, whereas the sender is the producer.
This distinction has to be recognized and accepted by the receiver.
b) A communication in both directions has to be established between all the actors in the
triangle.
3.4. Social trust in risk communication
The public’s perception of risks will affect how the communication triangle is expressed in
different societies. Still, perceptions of risk are often examined separately from risk
communication. Dennis Mileti and Colleen Fitzpatrick have made an attempt to bring these
fields together. In 1991 they presented a communication model with the purpose to determine
social factors in risk communication that might affect risk perceptions and public behavior:
8
Yeh, mon. No problem
Fanny Hellsing
Stockholm University
Source: Mileti and Fitzpatrick (1991:20). The model has been slightly graphically modified to clarify how risk
communication is related to risk perceptions and risk behavior.
Mileti and Fitzpatrick (1991) are clearly inspired by the cultural rationality approach. The
characteristics of the communication process (channel, frequency, source and process) will
affect how the risk communication is perceived. Likewise, characteristics of the message
(specificity, consistency, certainty, accuracy and clarity) will affect the public’s perception of
the message. When the message is received, individual factors such as social network,
previous knowledge, personal experience and cognition affect if the risk communication will
change risk perceptions and behavior related to those (Mileti & Fitzpatrick, 1991:21f).
Nordlund (2000) presents trust as an explicit factor in the communication triangle. Mileti
and Fitzpatrick (1991:20) do not. Still, trust is an implicit theme throughout Mileti’s and
Fitzpatrick’s model. If the public does not perceive the message as trustworthy, the risk
communication is less likely to affect perceptions and behavior. With this in mind it becomes
essential to investigate how the communication triangle is affected by social trust in different
social and cultural settings. Hence, the present study will examine how the communication
triangle can be illustrated in Jamaica – and if the factors suggested by Mileti and Fitzpatrick
(1991) can be used to understand relationships within the communication triangle.
9
3.5. Previous studies of social trust in risk communication
Yeh, mon. No problem
Fanny Hellsing
Stockholm University
One of the first scholars to acknowledge social trust in risk communication was the American
geographer Gilbert White. White (1945) investigated how the number of insurance claims
could increase, even when more financial resources were spent on mitigation and public
education. White’s conclusion was that the respondents of his study considered flooding an
‘Act of God’. Since the respondents in the study put more faith in God than in the authorities,
was risk information distributed by the latter inefficient as a tool for disaster preparedness.
Paul Slovic has carried out several influential studies of perceived risk and risk
communication. Slovic mainly addresses man-made disasters and has done several studies on
nuclear power in the United States versus France. Slovic (1993:76) stresses the importance of
a broad perspective; technical, social, political, legal and psychological factors are connected
in risk perceptions and risk communication. Slovic’s research focuses on how perceptions of
risks are constructed. His empirical data confirm that the public’s level of trust in a particular
institution is likely to have an impact on how affected the public is by the risk communication
(see Slovic, 1986; Slovic, MacGregor & Kraus 1987; Slovic, Flynn & Layman, 1991; Slovic,
1993; Slovic, 1997). Despite this theory, Slovic never suggests which factors that are likely to
affect the public’s level of trust in an institution.
George Cvetkovich and Ragnar Löfstedt (1999) suggest four assumptions necessary to
understand how social trust is established. First, trust implies a difference in power and
control. Second, trust involves a risk taken by the receiver of a message. Third, trust is an
expectation about a relationship. Fourth, social trust implies that the public has a choice when
to trust and who to trust. (Cvetkovich & Löfstedt, 1999:4f).
Peters, Covello and McCallum (1997) carry out a hypothesis testing investigating social
trust in the (American) government, industry and citizen groups. According to Peters et al.
(1997:47) is the level of social trust dependent on how the receiver experience the sender’s; a)
knowledge and expertise, b) openness and honesty, c) care and concern. For the government
to increase its credibility, it is also important to show commitment (Peters et al., 1997:47).
Roger Kasperson’s study (1986) suggest the same conclusions as Peters et al. (1997), but he
also adds the need to have a two-way communication in order to establish social trust in risk
communication. Without letting the receiver make its concerns known, social trust will
decrease or not be established at all (Kasperson, 1986:278).
Numerous of studies in the past decade have addressed social trust in risk
communication. Lillian Trettin and Catherine Musham (2000:422f) agree with Kasperson
10
Yeh, mon. No problem
Fanny Hellsing
Stockholm University
(1986) when stating that a dialogue is necessary for the public to trust the authorities. In
addition to the dialogue do the authorities also have to establish emergency routines to
increase the social trust (Trettin and Musham, 422f). Other studies recognize quick response
and targeted information as especially important for trust in public risk communication (see
Wray, Rivers, Jupka & Clements, 2006; Kapucu, Berman & Wang, 2008).
One of the above-mentioned studies emphasizes the geographical aspect of social trust in
risk communication. Wray et al. (2006) interview respondents in urban versus rural areas
about their expectations on emergency assistance after terrorist attacks. The rural population
shows (in comparison with the urban residents) little confidence regarding assistance in times
of emergencies (Wray et al., 2006:68). The distrust is often directed towards the federal
government, and is somewhat reduced by the rural population’s greater trust in the local
authorities (Wray et al., 2006:68). The greater trust in local authorities can be explained by
the fact that residents in smaller, rural communities often know local politicians and
emergency staff in person (Wray et al., 2006:68).
To sum up previous research in the field, one can say that social trust in risk
communication is easily vanished, but can be hard to reconstruct. Some scholars (e.g.
Cvetkovich & Löfstedt, 1999) argue that trust in risk communication implies a relationship
built on differences in power and control, however the receiver rarely perceives this as unfair.
Also, the receiver can always choose when and if to trust the sender, which implies social trust
as a key factor in any risk communication. However, a majority of the scholars within the
research field of risk communication argue that social trust only can be constructed in a
symmetrical communication (e.g. Kasperson, 1986; Trettin & Musham, 2000; Nordlund,
2000). Furthermore, the sender has to give the impression of being honest, knowledgeable
and truly carrying for the receiver. Preferably, the message is specific, certain and accurate –
produced by a credible sender and communicated through a reliable communicator. Still,
factors such as social network, demographics, previous knowledge and experiences will affect
how the risk information is perceived and utilized by the receiver (e.g. Mileti & Fitzpatrick
1991).
11
Yeh, mon. No problem
Fanny Hellsing
Stockholm University
3.6. Knowledge gap
A majority of the studies mentioned above addresses either man-made disasters (where
someone often can be blamed for causing it) or hazards (latent- or possible risks). However,
there is a knowledge gap when it comes to the absence of social trust in risk communication
addressing immediate risks – or possible risks likely to soon become immediate risks. Natural
disasters in Jamaica can be defined as possible risks, but they are likely to become immediate
risks in a near future. Hurricanes, flooding and landslides are not a question of ‘if’ in Jamaica,
but ‘when’. How is risk communication affected by social trust in a context where the
communication is not a choice, but rather a necessity to survive?
A previous study (Powell & Lewis, 2008) states that Jamaican authorities suffer from low
credibility and legitimacy. On a scale from 1 to 7 (with 1 being no trust at all), does the
Jamaican public express an average trust of 4,3 for the parish councils (Powell & Lewis,
2008:87). This is to be considered a low trust in comparison with other Latin American and
Caribbean countries in the same study (Powell & Lewis 2008:87). Hence, Lawrence Powell
and Balford Lewis (1986:87) suggest an immediate investigation on this matter, since this low
level of trust may cause political controversies in Jamaica.
In addition to Powell’s and Lewis’ alarming report (2008) do studies emphasize
significant deficiencies regarding disaster preparedness and emergency management in
Jamaica. While studies financed by the Jamaican authorities tend to be very optimistic about
the parish council’s information campaigns (e.g. George, 2008; Isaacs, 2008; Young, 2008), is
United Nations deeply concerned about understaffed Parish Disaster Preparedness Offices,
informal settlements and a public that by no means are well-educated in terms of disaster
preparedness (see United Nations, 2007:73; 79-82; 93).
The purpose of the present study is to examine how social trust affects the public risk
communication in Jamaica. Such an aim is twofold. First, the study will contribute to a
research field that over the years has been criticized for being too theoretical (e.g. Sjöberg,
1999). Second, the study will examine social trust in a developing country exposed to
numerous multiple natural disasters. Considering the poor financial resources it is of great
importance for the local authorities to spend its resources wisely. However, this can only be
done if the parish councils are aware of its own shortcomings in terms of credibility and
legitimacy.
12
Yeh, mon. No problem
Fanny Hellsing
Stockholm University
4. Aim and research questions
Natural disasters are frequently occurring in Jamaica. With that in mind, it is of great
importance to understand whom the public in Jamaica entrusts to provide them with risk- and
crisis communication. One of the aims of the present study is to examine in what way the
level of social trust affects public risk communication (hence, the receivers’ ability to carry
out disaster preparedness). Furthermore, the purpose of the present study is to come up with
suggestions for what can be done to improve the respondents’ social trust in the local
authorities, and consequently their ability to handle natural disasters in Jamaica.
The study is designed as an ethnographic field study in one of Jamaica’s thirteen
parishes, namely St Elizabeth. The study will take its point of departure at the local
authorities, the parish council, since those are authorized by the Jamaican government to carry
out public risk communication. However, other actors involved in the public risk
communication may be addressed as well.
a) How is public risk communication carried out in St Elizabeth?
b) How do the respondents receive knowledge about possible risks and disaster
preparedness?
c) Do the respondents express social trust in any of the actors in the public risk
communication? How can the level of trust be said to affect the respondents’ disaster
preparedness?
d) Is the ‘communication triangle’ equilateral in Jamaican risk communication? If not, is
that negative for the public’s ability to handle natural disasters? What can be done to
reduce any negative effects?
4.1. Limitations of the study
The purpose of this study is to contribute to the research field by examining a well-established
topic in a less explored context; Jamaica. There are reasons to believe that social trust is not
the only factor affecting risk communication in Jamaica. However, these other factors will not
be explored further within the present study.
The field study will take place in the parish of St Elizabeth. As a result of the
geographical limitations no conclusions can be made about social trust and risk
communication in other areas of Jamaica. Neither can anything be said about risk
13
Yeh, mon. No problem
Fanny Hellsing
Stockholm University
communication on a national level, or risk communication by non-governmental
organizations active in other areas of Jamaica.
The respondents are all in the age 40 to 65 years old. Hence, the respondents are not
representative for the population of St Elizabeth as a whole. Nothing can therefore be said
about how the population in general entrusts actors in the public risk communication.
The Parish Disaster Preparedness Office has a liability to carry out public education
about all hazards in the parish. This involves natural- and man-made disasters. This study will
only address risk communication related to natural disasters. To distinguish them, natural
disasters are defined as hazards due to topography and meteorological conditions in Jamaica.
Another distinction would be that the public can prepare for natural disasters, but they can
never escape them if they stay in the area.
5. Methods
Ethnographic studies can be defined as interpretations of cultures (Spradley, 1980:3). Culture
can then be expressed as the concept of studying behavior patterns associated with a particular
group of people (Spradley, 1980:5; Fetterman, 2010:16). To enable an accurate interpretation
of a culture, it is crucial to have data confirmed by multiple sources (Fetterman, 2010:52;
94ff; Creswell, 2003:14). With this in mind, the present study is based on participant
observations as well as qualitative interviews.
5.1. Participant observations
Culture often remains at a tacit level of knowledge (Spradley, 1980:188). To reveal this tacit
knowledge, ethnographers often carry out studies in a non-familiar setting (Spradley,
1980:52f; Schrøder et al., 2003:58; 65; Jorgensen, 1989:13). The present study takes place in
a, for the researcher, new cultural context, namely Jamaica.
James Spradley (1980:60) distinguishes four kinds of observations; passive, moderate,
active or complete participation. In this study moderate participation has been carried out.
This means that the ethnographer has balanced between an insider’s and an outsider’s
perspective (Spradley, 1980:60). Since the researcher has no previous experience of Jamaica,
it can be argued that the present study is made with an outsider’s perspective. However, the
14
Yeh, mon. No problem
Fanny Hellsing
Stockholm University
researcher has made an attempt to become an insider by working at St Elizabeth Parish
Council for three months (January to March 2011). These months were spent at the Parish
Disaster Preparedness Office, following the PDC in her daily work. Observations were made
at council meetings, committee meetings and community workshops. The work at the parish
council also involved assisting the PDC in shelter inspections and emergency drills across the
parish. Numerous informal interviews have taken place during these observations. The
interviews have mainly addressed the PDC and other representatives of public risk
communication, but also with residents in St Elizabeth.
5.2. Qualitative interviews
Much of any culture is encoded in linguistic form (Spradley, 1980:9; Fetterman, 2010:6).
Qualitative interviews are able to explain how and why social processes occur (Rubin &
Rubin, 2005:3). Therefore interviews are one of the most important data-gathering techniques
in ethnographic research (Fetterman, 2010:40).
In addition to the observations and informal interviews were seventeen semi-structured,
qualitative interviews carried out in St Elizabeth. Semi-structured interviews take its point of
departure in an interview guide, but follow-up questions can be developed during the session
(Rubin & Rubin, 2005:12). Because the ethnographer had little pre-knowledge of the settings
and any risk communication, the majority of the questions were open-ended. Therefore the
answers were hard to predict and a semi-structured interview guide suitable for the study.
Five of the seventeen interviews are what Uwe Flick (2006:165) labels expert interviews.
Respondents in expert interviews are not selected because of their personal worldview, but for
their specific profession or knowledge (Flick, 2006:165). The respondents of the present study
were selected because of their profession. Two respondents work at the St Elizabeth Parish
Council, one at the Black River Fire Brigade, one at Jamaica Red Cross and one as a
journalist in St Elizabeth. These are all organizations currently involved in Jamaican public
risk communication.
The remaining twelve interviews are what Flick (2006:169) refers to as ethnographic
interviews. Ethnographic interviews are less formal than expert interviews (Flick, 2006:169).
They are however distinguished from an ordinary conversation by a formal request to carry
out an interview (Spradley, 1979:59f). The twelve ethnographic interviews were using the
same interview guide and the respondents were carefully selected (see below).
15
Yeh, mon. No problem
Fanny Hellsing
Stockholm University
The population in St Elizabeth was structured into categories based on age (40-65 years old),
gender, occupation, level of education and current residence. Ten respondents were then
selected to represent as many constellations of demographics as possible. The purpose of this
method of sampling was to have a broad representation of the adult population in St
Elizabeth. A detailed record of the respondents’ demographics is to be found in Appendix 1.
Two ethnographic interviews were carried out to test the interview guide and the
interview situation in Jamaica. These interviews took place in Marlie Hill, a small village in
the parish of Manchester. The interview guide was significantly restructured as a result of
these interviews. Since the respondents of these interviews do not live in St Elizabeth, the
results of the ‘test interviews’ are not taken into account in the present study.
Successful ethnographic interviews often take place in settings where the respondents
feel comfortable (Creswell, 2003:205). With this in mind, all interview sessions were carried
out in the respondent’s home or workplace. The recorded interview sessions have an average
length of half an hour, but informal conversations often took place before and after the formal
session. Data from these informal conversations will not be quoted in the present study.
Nevertheless do they add to the researcher’s understanding of risk communication and risk
perceptions in Jamaica. They can therefore be said to contribute to the analysis in an indirect
way.
5.3. Validity
Validity in qualitative studies does not have the same connotations as in quantitative research.
Rather than reliability and other researchers doing the very same interpretation, validity in
ethnography is constructed by making the study truthful to the ethnographer and its research
objects (Rubin & Rubin, 2005:30; Creswell, 2003:195f; Schrøder et al., 2003:24).
Consequently some considerations has been done to strengthen the internal validity in this
present study;
The purpose of the present study is to examine if social trust are to be considered a factor
in public risk communication. Not to have misleading findings, it has been considered
important to leave any economical or geographical factors at this point. Therefore respondents
with different occupations, residences and economical status have been interviewed. Because
of this, the sample has no statistical representativity for a larger population.
16
Yeh, mon. No problem
Fanny Hellsing
Stockholm University
Ethnography is, as stressed before, an interpretation of culture. In this case, the ethnographer
has carried out a study in a new cultural context. In order to make an accurate translation of
situations, it is essential to have data confirmed by multiple sources (Fetterman, 2010:96). To
strengthen the validity, cross-examination has been carried out. Hence, the participant
observations and the qualitative interviews are considered equally important in this study.
Observations and qualitative interviews are two time-consuming methods, and applying them
in correlation has affected the external validity in terms of less respondents and interviews.
Yet, a mixed approach can often benefit the validity because limitations of one method can be
balanced with strength of another (Creswell, 2003:15).
To avoid new questions arising after the ethnographer has left the field, a cyclical pattern
of investigation can be adopted (Spradley, 1980:35). This would mean that data-gathering is
taking place in parallel of analysis of the same (Jorgensen, 1989:18). In the present study,
observations were made in parallel with the interviews. The selection of respondents emerged
from observations made in the field. Moreover, expert interviews were carried out in parallel
with the ethnographic interviews. Every interview was transcribed and evaluated before the
next interview took place. The evaluation of previous interviews and observations made the
interview questions become narrow and more and more close-ended as the analysis
proceeded. Hence, the cyclical pattern of investigation made it possible for the ethnographer
to search for the answers before leaving the field.
Validity in ethnographic studies is often generated by data collected in a natural setting
(LeCompte & Goetz, 1982:35). Because the respondents in the present study often perceived
the interview sessions as formal, data constructed in the informal conversations before and
after the sessions are of great importance for the validity of the present study. Furthermore, a
majority of the respondents are people whom I got to know through my host family or via the
other volunteers in Black River. I was placed at my host family in Black River by the
independent, non-governmental organization Projects Abroad Jamaica. None of my
respondents had any personal relations with the parish council. I also conducted the
interviews after finishing my work at the Parish Disaster Preparedness Office. This was
essential not to have the respondents believe I made the study on behalf of the Jamaican
authorities. I have also promised the respondents anonymity and not to publish the interview
transcriptions as appendixes. Altogether, these measures made it possible for the respondents
and me to establish a faithful relationship, which in turn adds to the validity of the present
study.
17
Yeh, mon. No problem
Fanny Hellsing
Stockholm University
As one last measure to strengthen the validity is the respondents directly quoted in this study.
The purpose of quotes is to strengthen the transparency and providing the reader an
opportunity to do an opposite reading of the findings (Creswell, 2003:196; Spradley,
1980:210). The quotes are only carefully edited; changes are done if the reader otherwise
might misunderstand what the respondent is trying to say. Characteristics of Jamaican English
have not been edited (as for example the common use of “me” instead of “I”). Words in
Jamaican Creole has not been replaced, but is translated in a note at the bottom of the page.
All in all, the purpose of the frequent quotes are for the respondents to recognize themselves
in the present study – just as Creswell (2003:195f), Rubin & Rubin (2005:30) and Schrøder et
al. (2003:24) define as validity in any ethnographic studies.
6. The findings
6.1. Risk communication at St Elizabeth Parish Council
The purpose of the following section is to illustrate how the St Elizabeth Parish Council
carries out risk communication. How is such a communication designed, and what
communication channels do they use to reach the intended receivers (i.e. the public)?
St Elizabeth Parish Council is divided into sex departments; Planning, Disaster
Preparedness, Poor Relief, Roads and Works, Finance and Accounts; and General
Administration. Two of those, The Planning Department and The Disaster Preparedness
Office, confirm they distribute risk information and carry out emergency management.
6.1.1. The Parish Disaster Preparedness Office
The Parish Disaster Preparedness Office in St Elizabeth has one employee, namely the Parish
Disaster Coordinator (PDC), miss Renée Bradford-Britton. The national agency ODPEM
provides guidelines for the office and assigns the PDC projects. The PDC also have a
responsibility to schedule and carry out emergency drills with public institutions and
companies within the parish.
Duties assigned the PDC vary according to season. During the hurricane season, miss
Bradford-Britton is often busy with emergency management and crisis communication. She is
responsible for administrate the public emergency shelters, assist the population with supplies
18
Yeh, mon. No problem
Fanny Hellsing
Stockholm University
and so forth. Often emergency management and crisis communication is directed to the
decision-makers in the families, which would often be the adults.
In the dry-season there are usually less emergencies and the PDC have time to focus on
scheduled duties such as risk communication. Such public education tends to focus on school
children. Miss Bradford-Britton describe public education in St Elizabeth as follows:
“I try to visit each school at least once a year. When I visit them I do an
emergency drill with the teachers and the students. It usually takes about an hour,
depending how many students there are. Right now we have ‘Earthquake Month’
which means I talk to the students about earthquakes and what they are suppose
to do if the feel tremble.
With the high school children I can talk to them why it happens… how the
crusts sometimes meet and cause tremble. The younger children will not know
that, but they can do the emergency drill as soon as the start basic school.
An earthquake drill starts with the students hiding under the desk or in the
doorway and count to twenty. Earthquakes often don’t last longer than that. Then
the students have to leave the classroom and line up in the assembly area that all
schools have.”
(Interview Bradford-Britton, 2011).
Upon request, the PDC also go to other institutions to conduct emergency drills. After a
phone call from the manager of a public infirmary in Santa Cruz, we go there to carry out an
emergency drill. The procedure of the emergency drill at the infirmary is similar to the one in
schools, but instead of talking to the patients miss Bradford-Britton address the hospital staff.
Less effort is put in why earthquakes occur, and miss Bradford-Britton speak with the staff
about how to evacuate disabled patients in case of emergencies.
Before the PDC leaves any emergency drill, she makes sure to leave brochures, posters
and emergency numbers. The brochures and posters are produced by ODPEM and are sent to
the Parish Disaster Preparedness Offices upon request. Miss Bradford-Britton explains to me
why she always makes sure to leave printed information:
“If I go to a school, I always leave brochures and posters to the school principle.
Those can be handed out to the teachers and put on the wall where everyone can
see them. It is important they have posters visible in the school, because people
have a tendency to feel safe if they do not get reminded of hazards. Also, people
19
Yeh, mon. No problem
Fanny Hellsing
Stockholm University
generally do not remember emergency numbers to the police, fire brigade and the
ambulance so it is important they can find this kind of information easily. Before I
leave, I also make sure they have my number so they can call me at any time.”
(Interview Bradford-Britton, 2011).
The PDC says she has no time to arrange field days or public events, but she regularly
receives invitations to attend volunteer workshops and community meetings. Most of the time
these events are organized by other public departments/committees or volunteer organizations
in the parish. Miss Bradford-Britton tells me she visits those events as often as she can.
However, whenever an invitation arrives during my stay in Jamaica, she is busy in a meeting
on a different location. During my three months at the Parish Disaster Preparedness Office,
we only attend one such public event. This happened to be a workshop in Thornton organized
by the Jamaica Red Cross. When we arrived at the church in Thornton, ten volunteers were
busy on their second (out of three) meetings to become members of the Community Disaster
Response Team (CDRT) in Thornton. We stayed for about an hour and miss Bradford-Britton
gave all the volunteers feedback on the maps they had made to illustrate hazards in their local
community.
Except the opportunity to meet the PDC whenever she is traveling around the parish, the
public can also call or visit the Parish Disaster Preparedness Office at the parish council in
Black River. However, the office does not have any official opening hours and it has to be
closed as soon as the miss Bradford-Britton is in a meeting on other locations. Miss BradfordBritton explains why personal visits are not very reliable as a communication channel:
“I am the only one in the office so I have to close it whenever I leave Black River.
I am on the road for several hours a day, so the easiest way to get in touch with
me is to call my cell phone. I leave my phone number wherever I go, and it is also
available at the General Administration [at the parish council].
I rarely get calls from individuals. If they need assistance they usually go to
the Poor Relief or the Ministry of Labour and Social Security [a public agency in
Santa Cruz, St Elizabeth]. I have been working here for two years now, and I do
not think I have ever gotten a call from the public how to prepare in advance for
natural disasters.”
(Interview Bradford-Britton, 2011).
20
Yeh, mon. No problem
Fanny Hellsing
Stockholm University
6.1.2. The Planning Department
Informal settlements (also called ‘squatting’) are when people settle down – build houses and
cultivate land – without permission from the authorities. Often informal settlements in St
Elizabeth are placed in hazardous zones where it for one or another reason is not appropriate
to live (Interview Taylor, 2011). Informal settlements are illegal in Jamaica, but the parish
councils do not have the right to remove any settlements. There are numerous of informal
settlements in floodplains across St Elizabeth. Informal settlers are a political concern, but
they can also become a financial burden for the parish council in times of emergencies. The
Parish Council has a liability to assist and provide aid to every citizen in St Elizabeth, even if
they are living in informal settlements. To spare public financial resources, the Planning
Department encourage the public to have building permission for any new building
constructed. Shane Taylor at the Planning Department explains it further:
“St Elizabeth is very diverse in terms of people… the environment, the economic
base, well right across. /…/ Planning would be about getting ideas for better farming
practices in terms of irrigation and nutrition to soils and so on. /…/ Informing about
the importance of drainage so the houses do not get flooded out. We only approve
permissions for buildings that are in a safe area in terms of natural disasters.”
(Interview Taylor, 2011).
The Planning Department does not have the resources to do inspection of houses that already
has been built, but they try to advise in every new building process. Employees at the
Planning Department do this by mail or phone when someone formally applies for a building
permit (Interview Taylor, 2011).
The Planning Department also carries out public education by attending public events. As
with the Parish Disaster Preparedness Office, they get invitations from others who organize
public events in different forms. In comparison with the Disaster Preparedness Office has the
Planning Department more staff (around five full-time employees) and fewer meetings
scheduled. For this reason, they often have the opportunity to attend these events. I attended
one public event on behalf of the planning department during my stay in Jamaica. The event
was organized by the Social Development Commission to encourage the public to register
possession of property. With advertisements on the radio and through a town crier, the public
was invited to visit the event in central Black River, 25th of March, 2011. The planning
department had a stall on this event and the public approached them with questions about
building permits, safe constructions and registration of property.
21
6.2. Disaster preparedness among the respondents
Yeh, mon. No problem
Fanny Hellsing
Stockholm University
The purpose of this section is to illustrate risk perceptions expressed by the respondents. It
will also be examined how the respondents of the ethnographic interviews (hereby referred to
as ‘the respondents’) perceive public risk communication in the parish of St Elizabeth.
6.2.1. Personal experience
Hurricane Gilbert in 1988 is often referred to as an eye-opener for Jamaican authorities in
terms of disaster preparedness and public risk communication (see United Nations, 2007:61;
Young, 2008:43; Isaacs, 2008:20). Hurricane Gilbert caused storm surges, flooding and wind
damages in all of Jamaica. 45 people were killed, approximately 500,000 Jamaicans were
homeless and 50 percent of the water supply was damaged (United Nations, 2007:77f).
Hurricane Gilbert was a disaster not only for the authorities, but of course also for the
population. When I ask the respondents what naturals disasters they can recall, all of them
immediately refer to hurricane Gilbert. They can often in detail describe what they did they
day hurricane Gilbert reached Jamaica in September 1988.
“I remember Gilbert. Gilbert was in 1989 I think. /…/ In 1988. I was excited.
Excited. I wanted to see what could happen. I heard on the radio that it was going
to come to Jamaica. I went to the store and bought food. I had a small baby. /…/
The electricity was gone. And then the storm hit. We were out on the street
helping people. /.../. It was raining and things were in the air. You know, zincs and
barrels. The trees were swaying all the way down to the ground and up again. The
streetlights were swaying. There were things everywhere.” (Respondent 9, 2011).
“I could tell you about Gilbert. It was the first one I experienced. Gilbert. Yeah.
My daughter was four months old. I didn’t take it serious because I didn’t know
anything about it. /…/ I didn’t know anything could be like that. /…/ Well, people
talk about the storm 1961 and music 1961 was Bob Marley but I didn’t
understand it cold be like that. We didn’t take it serious, I didn’t prepare a thing.
/…/ It was frightening with the breeze2 and all.” (Respondent 3, 2011)
“Gilbert… Gilbert is the first hurricane I really experienced. A know there was a
lot of damages around here. /…/ I did nothing. I did nothing until you know… my
2
Winds during hurricanes can be referred to as “breeze” in Jamaican English.
22
Yeh, mon. No problem
Fanny Hellsing
Stockholm University
sister called me. She was telling me. /…/ I can clearly remember that it got all
dark. It was just darkness. Pitch black. And I called her and told her to come over
here, to come together in this house. So we all came together in this house.”
(Respondent 7, 2011).
“Well, the first one – Gilbert – I was here. But I was kind of looking forward
because it was my first. When it came and started damage, I realized that a
hurricane can entail. The other hurricanes I was a but scared of them coming
here because I was more knowledgeable. I was worried about my family, if they
were prepared, so we did preparation as buying the necessary; tinned food,
bottled water, batteries and flashlights.” (Respondent 4, 2011).
A remarkable number of the respondents describe themselves as inexperienced and
unprepared for natural disasters when hurricane Gilbert arrived in Jamaica in 1988. Only one
can recall taking any actions after hearing the warning for hurricane Gilbert: “I went to the
store and bought food” (Respondent 9, 2011).
Several of the respondents tell me how they revaluated hurricanes and changed their
perception of risk: “Hurricanes are frightening! So scary, so scary – I know that now!”
(Respondent 7, 2011) and “I know I have to take it seriously now. If they say a hurricane is
coming – I prepare.” (Respondent 3, 2011). Still, only one respondent can recall any actual
changes in behavior after experiencing hurricane Gilbert:
“If I go to the store and I used to buy one stuff, I buy two. I put one away, you
know every other week. /…/ Every time I used to buy three, I buy for and put one
away. Candles, batteries, cuisine oil, food. I have two stored water.” (Respondent
9, 2011).
Respondent 10 did not live in Jamaica in 1988, but her experience of hurricane Ivan in 2004
has changed her way of preparing as soon as she hear a hurricane warning in media:
“I think it was Ivan we didn’t have proper water setup because we used one or
two buckets at that time. /…/ And when Ivan came we were caught off guard! And
then we had to go all the way up to Brompton to get water. It was terrible! So
when Dean was coming I went and bought that trunk. So during the whole time of
Dean had water. /…/ But we weren’t prepared for Ivan. We went downtown to buy
our flashlights and whatever, whatever, but we weren’t prepared for the water
23
Yeh, mon. No problem
Fanny Hellsing
Stockholm University
situation. We only had some little bucket, but we weren’t prepared it would be so
terrible. /…/ So since that we learned from our mistakes.” (Respondent 10, 2011).
6.2.2. Disaster preparedness as in hurricane preparedness
Previous studies emphasize that people rather than focusing on the most recent disaster, often
focus on the largest one they have experienced (e.g. Lave & Lave, 1991:262). The
respondents refer to hurricanes as the most frequently occurring natural disaster in their
community. This is also the only kind natural disaster that any of the respondents consider
possible to prepare for. A majority also knows that earthquakes and landslides can occur, but
none of them consider these as possible to predict, hence carry out any disaster preparedness.
Disaster preparations are most of the time taken after a warning has been broadcast in
media. A majority of the respondents confirm they buy tinned food after hearing a hurricane
warning. If they can afford, a few respondents also store water and buy flashlights and
batteries to operate the radio in case of power cuts.
The economical aspect of disaster preparedness seems to be essential for several of the
respondents. Respondent 10 say that she cannot keep food storage at home all the time,
because she cannot afford to have ‘money tied up in food just in case something happens’.
Another aspect of economics is that the wealthier respondents tend to have useful equipment
at home. The wireless radio I found in Respondent 10’s living room was not bought as
emergency equipment, but it can very well be used as one in times of emergencies.
6.2.3. A religious aspect
Jamaica is exposed to a various kind of life-threatening natural disasters. With this in mind,
the respondents are surprisingly relaxed when it comes to disaster preparedness. As stated
above, no actions at all are taken for mitigation of less frequent natural disasters (earthquakes,
tsunamis, coastal erosion, landslides etcetera). To some extent, this relaxed attitude can be
explained by the religious beliefs in Jamaica. The majority of Jamaicans is various kinds of
Christians. There are churches in almost every street corner, and religious symbols are seen
everywhere. When I ask the respondents how they prepare for natural disasters, they are
referring to God:
24
Yeh, mon. No problem
Fanny Hellsing
Stockholm University
“You have to trust in the Lord, you know. Send him prayers. Yes. Pray and hope
that you’ll stay safe. ‘Father, you know what is best’. We’re really a Christian
country. I pray.” (Respondent 9, 2011).
“I’m not really scared because what happen has to happen. We rely on the Lord.
It doesn’t make sense to be scared.” (Respondent 1, 2011).
“I think it’s up to God because some things really don’t make sense you know.”
(Respondents 3, 2011).
“It’s just an act of God so you just have to hope for the best!” (Respondent 10, 2011).
“I have no insurance because I cannot afford it. I pray nothing happens.”
(Respondent 7, 2011).
6.2.4. Long-term disaster preparedness
None of the respondents can confirm taking any long-term actions to decrease the
consequences of natural disasters. None of the respondents have reflected upon such actions,
and they all claim that nothing can be done to prevent natural disasters. When I approach
them with suggestions such as safe constructions of buildings, flood secured houses, hurricane
straps and photocopies of valuable documents, the respondents confirm they never considered
taking such actions. Respondent 10 explains her lack of interest in long-term preparations as
follows:
“Ivan blow off all my roof in the bedroom and the bathroom. It was totally open. I
had to get a carpenter from Mandeville to fix it. /…/. I knew the roof was bad, but
I just hopped for the best. If it was my house I would probably do something about
it.” (Respondent 10, 2011).
25
Yeh, mon. No problem
Fanny Hellsing
Stockholm University
6.2.5. The parish council as a source for assistance and information
None of the informants can recall any risk information distributed by the parish council. Yet,
they confirm they would contact the parish council for emergency assistance – if they have to.
Still, there is a widespread reluctance asking the parish council for help. Respondent 9
explains why:
“Well, if I needed help I would have to go there. /…/. They just give people and
they do not know… /…/. Because they’re the persons supposed to lay card on the
table and display them for you. You don’t sit back with your air conditioner. Go to
the people and know they are comfortable!” (Respondent 9, 2011).
Three of the respondents have personal experience of contacting the parish council for
assistance. One respondent has also advised her daughter to contact the parish council for
assistance. Those three respondents explain to me how they experienced the contact with the
parish council:
“Me roof, you know. I couldn’t get it done. /…/ I go to the parish council.
Someone there and I looking for… yes… I contact them. /…/ We have them
helping there now. But it’s been a long time now. Very long time.” (Respondent 8,
2011).
“I remember Gilbert. I lost a lot of things there… my roof came off. Yah mon. /…/.
You know them not really… we had to help ourselves. /…/. Every time they come
they ask for number and they ask you questions but them not really come again,
you know.” (Respondent 1, 2011).
“My daughter lives down below me. The other she was not around and I looked at
her roof. The rain came so hard… was it last year? Everything was wet and
damaged. I sent her to check with the parish council if she could get a mattress.
/…/. She asked for help but she did not get any. She is living with me now because
we had to put some block.” (Respondent 9, 2011).
Those respondents who can afford it, prefer to hire a private carpenter rather than going to the
parish council. Some respondents also have family members who helped them recovering
from hurricanes.
26
Yeh, mon. No problem
Fanny Hellsing
Stockholm University
“Ivan blow off all my roof in the bedroom and the bathroom. It was totally open. I
had to get a carpenter from Mandeville to fix it. It took him about two days to fix
the roof. I had to pay him because I have no insurance.” (Respondent 10, 2011).
“Gilbert damaged the house I was sleeping in. It was near the sea. /…/ The roof
was blown off. And because of the hill it was eroded. With the other hurricanes
trees got blown off and agriculture goods were destroyed. Bananas were
destroyed. Yes. But we were able to manage on our own here in the village.”
(Respondent 4, 2011).
“Sometimes the community ask for help by the parish council, but we do not get it.
So I usually do not bother for myself to do it. But if I had to, I would. /…/. In the
drought we have a son who have a car. He drive water for us.” (Respondent 2,
2011).
The knowledge about the Parish Disaster Preparedness Office is generally low among the
respondents. Only one respondent knows there is a particular department for disaster
preparedness at the parish council. Three respondents recognize the PDC, but only one of
them because of her profession (the others live close to her and consequentley know her from
church). To get in touch with the parish council in case they needed emergency assistance, all
but one respondent would try to get in touch with elected politicians such as the Member of
Parliament (MP) or the councilor of their community.
All but one respondent knows that the parish council has a legal responsibility to carry
out emergency management. However, they are not very certain if the parish council is
responsible for public education and disaster preparedness. Neither can they describe what the
PDC is doing with her time when there is no to emergency handle.
6.2.6. Other sources for risk information
In addition to the public education organized by the parish council does Jamaica have several
non-governmental organizations (NGO’s) assisting individuals in disaster preparedness and
emergency management. The largest network is Jamaica Red Cross with fifteen branches
across Jamaica. One of the branches is St Elizabeth Red Cross, located in central Santa Cruz.
Jamaica Red Cross carries out workshops for CDRT’s (as in Thornton, see page 21) and
organizes public community meetings regarding preparedness for natural disasters. The Red
27
Yeh, mon. No problem
Fanny Hellsing
Stockholm University
Cross wants every community in St Elizabeth to have a CDRT, but because the work is
carried out on a voluntary basis it is difficult to find human and financial resources for this. In
March 2011, one third of the communities in St Elizabeth had an operating CDRT. (Interview
Doctor, 2011).
The respondents in the present study do not recognize what a CDRT is. Neither can they
recall having met someone who is working with disaster preparedness on a voluntary basis.
None of the respondents have attended workshops or community meetings organized by
either the parish council or the NGO’s. Only two of the respondents, both living in the same
community, can recall having heard of any such event:
“We have a centre down here. And they came here. The Maroon colonel put a
sign on there, they would come. They invite everyone in the community to come.
Me cannot read, but others told me. So I knew, but I did not have time to go. You
know, I am a farmer and I have to be out on the field every day.” (Respondent 2,
2011).
“Sometimes they have meetings at the community centre. But usually I do not
have time to go. Sometimes I did not hear of it before and someone comes by and
say there is a meeting going on, but I have not heard of it.” (Respondent 3, 2011).
6.2.7. Risk information in the media
The respondents use media to stay updated in terms of natural disasters. All respondents refer
to bulletins as their main information source in the hurricane season. A common scenario is
they hear some news from family and friends, and then immediately turn on the radio or
television to get the latest update. Wherever you are in Jamaica you always hear a radio, and
so the respondents may very well hear when a bulletin is broadcast. The respondents confirm
they listen more carefully for bulletins in the hurricane season, in comparison with the other
times of the year. Two respondents also tell me how they make observations outside to decide
if it is time to listen more carefully for bulletins:
“We do not usually have rain in January, February and March you know. It is a
strange thing. So I have been watching… the years go by and I listen. I hear the
weather, I listen. We are pretty much looking after ourselves if it is going to be a
disasters. So right now I am listening to the radio more than usual, because we
should not have all this rain this time of the year.” (Respondent 9, 2011).
28
Yeh, mon. No problem
Fanny Hellsing
Stockholm University
“We observe the weather. I feel the weather… if it starts to rain, I know it can
happen fast. If it is acting strange, I listen to the radio.” (Respondent 3, 2011).
Risk information in Jamaican media is mainly constituted by bulletins. Bulletins are messages
broadcast by all radio- and television stations at the same time. The bulletin is most of the
time just a weather forecast, but if necessary it is followed by a watch or a warning about an
upcoming natural disasters. The purpose of as for example a hurricane watch is to inform the
public that a hurricane is estimated to arrive in Jamaica within 48 hours. The watch also
inform the public how to secure property and what emergency equipment they ought to have
home. When the estimated arrival of the hurricane is less than 24 hours, a warning is
broadcast in the bulletin. Schools and workplaces are kept closed and the public is told to stay
indoors until they hear the bulletin telling them it is safe to leave the house. (Jamaica Amateur
Radio Association 2005:4).
In the dry-season are bulletins broadcast every sixth hour. In the hurricane season are
they scheduled every third hour, but they are broadcast more frequently if necessary. The
bulletins are broadcast across Jamaica, but they may contain local information if the PDC of a
certain parish has reported any critical information. (Interview Gordon, 2011).
The bulletins are produced by Jamaica Information Service (JIS). JIS is a governmental
agency with the purpose to carry out public education and increase the awareness of public
affairs (Planning Institute of Jamaica 2009:267). In addition to the bulletins does JIS produce
educational radio- and television shows addressing natural disasters and its consequences.
Two respondents in the present study can recall having heard of television shows produced by
JIS, but only one of them has actually watched it:
“When we approach the hurricane season, then every Sunday afternoon the JIS
give you information about what to do in case of a hurricane. What to do, how to
prepare – all of it. Yes. The JIS – Jamaica Information Service – give you
information about hurricanes and sometimes earthquakes.” (Respondent 7,
2011).
“I have heard of the show, but I have not seen it. But that is my fault because I
watch too much CNN. I do not watch local TV.” (Respondent 10, 2011).
All the respondents are well aware of the bulletins, and most of them use these messages as
the main source for crisis communication. Still, only a few of them can tell me who is the
producer of these messages. Suggested producers were the University of West Indies in
29
Yeh, mon. No problem
Fanny Hellsing
Stockholm University
Kingston, and the National Hurricane Centre in Miami (an American agency providing
weather forecasts for the Caribbean islands). In spite of this uncertainty regarding the
producer of the messages, they all express a great trust in crisis communication broadcast on
radio and television:
“I do not know who is making the bulletins. I do not think it is the governments; it
is higher, knowledgeable people you know. But they know.” (Respondent 9,
2011).
“We respond when we hear on the radio that it is near. When there is no way of
escaping, we prepare.” (Respondent 6, 2011).
“Whenever we hear a bulletin we take in the animals, carry wood and you know…
prepare. We do that even though the sun is shining, because we know that the
weather can change in a moment. /…/ We have learned the hurricanes are
dangerous.” (Respondent 3, 2011).
“When flood came we had a radio. So I never got into distress. You know, some
people do not want to leave their homes because they want to keep listening to the
radio.” (Respondent 1, 2011).
“I really trust the bulletins. They are very good at telling us on the radio and the
TV and so on about it coming. You know, once someone hear it, the word is
spread like wildfire. And then everybody goes home and turn on the TV and the
radio.” (Respondent 10, 2011).
“We always hear the broadcast. We have a radio running on electricity and
batteries. If it cuts off, we still have the radio to pick up bulletins. When we heard
a bulletin that the hurricane was near Cuba, coming to Jamaica, we decided to
prepare.” (Respondent 2, 2011).
30
Yeh, mon. No problem
Fanny Hellsing
Stockholm University
7. Discussion of the findings
7.1. Social trust in the Jamaican communication triangle
The findings suggest that social trust in Jamaica does not affect not how the respondents
perceive a message, but if they choose to listen to a certain communication channel at all.
Since the respondents express little or none social trust in the Parish Disaster Preparedness
Office, they also overlook any risk communication initiated by the Parish Council. Instead the
respondents make use of their own personal experiences from previous disasters. They also
listen for crisis communication broadcast in media. The following section will further
examine how the social trust affects the respondents’ ability to handle natural disasters.
7.1.1. Personal experience
The respondents express personal experiences of previous natural disasters as significant in
their risk perceptions and risk behavior. Most referred to are memories of hurricanes. Often
the respondent does not remember what year the hurricane passed, but always the name of it
and what s/he did in the moment the hurricane arrived. They all express a great respect for the
consequences of hurricanes, and they do confirm experiencing one have made them
revaluating hurricanes as a possible risk.
The re-evaluated perception of hurricanes can be said to have two possible outcomes. A
few respondents re-evaluate their perception of risk in terms of expressing a greater respect
for the consequences of hurricanes. However, their attitude towards risk information and risk
behavior remain unchanged. Instead they put all their faith in God to keep them safe. For this
group is social trust in the authorities’ risk information not an issue – the only one they trust is
God. For the remaining respondents, God is not the only option. They also believe in God and
send him prayers – but after experiencing a hurricane they also listen more carefully to
bulletins broadcast by media. A few of those respondents also change risk behavior in terms
of acting according to what is being said in the bulletins.
31
Yeh, mon. No problem
Fanny Hellsing
Stockholm University
7.1.2. Media
According to the respondents, media plays a major role in public risk communication. As
soon as they need crisis communication (often when they heard from friend and family
something has happened), they turn on the radio or television. As suggested above the
respondents are especially responsive of crisis communication about disasters from which
they have personal experience.
According to Nordlund (2000) the communication triangle has to be equilateral in a
democracy. The actors also have to be distinguished and accepted by the others within the
triangle. (Nordlund, 2000:125). In a Jamaican context this would mean that the receivers
recognize the authorities as the sender of all risk- and crisis communication. Media would be
recognized as the communicator of these messages. This cannot be said to be the case in St
Elizabeth. Instead, the respondents perceive the communicator as the sender. As a result of
this, the sender is not recognized at all. Hence, Nordlund’s communication triangle in a
Jamaican context would be illustrated like this:
The mix-up of communicator and sender in the Jamaican risk communication triangle might
be regarded as a theoretical technicality. However, I would like to argue why these findings
are essential in understanding why the respondents entrust the actors as they do, i.e. how
social trust is affecting the risk communication in Jamaica. The sender is credited with either
trust or distrust (depending on how reliable the message is perceived) in the risk
communication. Since the respondents perceive media as the sender of crisis communication,
media gain social trust. As the authorities are perceived as more or less absent in this process,
they are not able to establish a trustful relationship with the receiver in the communication
triangle.
32
Yeh, mon. No problem
Fanny Hellsing
Stockholm University
One reason for the high level of social trust in media may be that they tend to focus on crisis
communication. Crisis communication is often perceived as more credible than risk
communication. The reason for this can be found in the factors presented by Mileti and
Fitzpatrick (1991:20). A watch or a warning always include specific instructions how to
behave and where to go for assistance. Mileti and Fitzpatrick (1991) identify this as clarity
and guidance. Messages in crisis communication are also – in comparison with risk
communication – often characterized by specificity and consistency. They can also be
perceived as certain and accurate; the weather outside ‘confirms’ what is being broadcast in
the bulletins. In other words, crisis communication is characterized by several of the factors
Mileti & Fitzpatrick (1991:20) state as important for communication in order to be perceived
as credible. When media only broadcast crisis communication – i.e. ‘reliable’ information –
there is no wonder the respondents perceive them as trustworthy when it comes to natural
disasters.
Yet another criteria for social trust in risk communication are honesty, concern and
expertise (see Peters et al., 1997). The respondents express crisis communication as a way to
show care and concern for their safety. Media’s crisis communication – which is perceived as
specific, accurate and instructional – is therefore perceived as concern for the public safety.
Furthermore, the consistency of media’s crisis communication is perceived as care – but also
honesty. Because of the frequency of bulletins, media are quick to report deviations. To
change the message in crisis communication is not seen as less credible; the respondents are
well aware that no one in detail can predict natural disasters and so the criterion ‘honesty’ is
perceived as far more important than ‘expertise’ when it comes to crisis communication in
Jamaica.
The consistency in media’s distribution of crisis communication can also be said to create
another important feeling among the respondents. The phenomenon can be explained with the
proverb ‘a friend in need, is a friend indeed’. Media are a quite reliable communication
channels even when the roads are blocked or the telephone networks is out for the count.
Even though there is nothing new to report, media keep broadcasting bulletins. This
consistency seems to create a feeling of friendship. The media may not have very good news
to broadcast, but they do not abandon the respondents. As a result, the respondents express a
great feeling of social trust in radio as well as television.
The relationship created between Jamaican media and the respondents is by no means
unique for Jamaica. Maria Perez-Lugo made several studies addressing disaster preparedness
33
Yeh, mon. No problem
Fanny Hellsing
Stockholm University
and emergency management during hurricanes in Puerto Rico. Perez-Lugo states that media
cannot only be viewed as a tool for communication, but also an institution able to show
friendship, commitment and respect – things that are as important as the information itself
(Perez-Lugo, 2004:223). Therefore, Perez-Lugo (2004:219) labels this kind of relationship as
‘the need for emotional support and companionship during the Impact Phase’.
The findings presented above are not surprising. Media’s crisis communication can to a
large extent be characterized with what previous studies define as significant for social trust in
any risk- or crisis communication. However, significant with this finding is that media hardly
can be said to carry out a two-way communication, but rather a one-way information. Neither
the local authorities nor the public have an impact on what information media broadcast. The
national authorities can make suggestions and produce content, but the media are not required
to broadcast any of that. This makes everyone else in the communication triangle a passive
audience of risk/crisis information – not communication.
The findings referred to as risk information and not communication can be discussed
from different aspects. For one, it can be perceived as a defeat for the Local Government
Reform Act (2001); local governance and the public’s commitment in political matters are
most likely not encouraged in the current communication triangle. From another aspect, this
finding is noteworthy for the research field of social trust in risk communication. One-way
risk- and crisis communication have by several studies been held responsible for
deconstructing social trust (e.g. Slovic, 1986; Kasperson, 1986; Trettin & Musham, 2000;
Wray et al. 2006). As risk- and crisis communication often take place when the receiver is a
vulnerable position, they have an especially high need for recognition in terms of respect,
concern and sympathy. To communicate this recognition is said to be almost impossible in a
one-way communication process. The present study cannot confirm that social trust is
impossible in one-way risk information. Media carry out one-way crisis information with
bulletins, but they still possess a great amount of the respondents’ social trust. This might be
explained by the fact that media manage to communicate respect, concern and sympathy for
the public through the one-way directed message addressed as bulletins. It might also be
explained by the theory of defining the receiver’s expectations and make sure to respond to
these (see Cvetkovich & Löfstedt, 1999:5). Since the respondents do not expect a dialogue
with media, media’s credibility is not harmed by the absence of any dialogue. Instead media’s
credibility would be harmed if they cancelled bulletins – or were being dishonest by not
34
Yeh, mon. No problem
Fanny Hellsing
Stockholm University
reporting about an estimated natural disaster – since this is what the respondents expect from
media.
7.1.3. Social trust in the Parish Council
The respondents in the present study express little or no trust in the St Elizabeth Parish
Council as a source for risk communication. Eight out of ten respondents do not know if the
parish council distributes any risk information. Those two who have heard of any event
organized by the Parish Disaster Preparedness Office have chosen not to participate – even
though they express a wish to learn more about natural disasters.
Perhaps the absence of social trust in the parish council can be related to the PDC’s
choice of communication channels. Miss Bradford-Britton confirms she is focusing on
interpersonal communication. She prefers to be ‘on the road’, doing emergency drills and talk
to people in person. The public can also come to her office or give her a phone call. Despite
all these opportunities, the respondents do not express any confidence in the risk
communication carried out at the Parish Disaster Preparedness Office. A majority of the
respondents say their only opportunity to get in touch with the parish council is to pay the
office in Black River a visit. The respondents who live far from Black River are not sure they
would ever have the time to go there – or the possibility (the roads are often blocked by fallen
trees, landslides, heavy rain or flooding). Hence, the interpersonal communication is not a
very reliable choice of communicating with the public. This seem to have an effect on the
social trust as well; the respondents express a low level of social trust in the PDC, especially
those respondents who live far from the parish council.
The parish council as less entrusted than media can be illustrated with the public phone
service ‘116’. The service is free of charge; anyone in Jamaica can phone 116 to have the
latest updated weather forecast. In other words, the 116 service and media are to be
considered equal in terms of updates and accessibility. Still, the respondents prefer bulletins
instead of calling 116 – even though they might have to wait longer for the next bulletin in
comparison with calling the 116 phone service. Preferring media might to some extent be
explained by Perez-Lugo’s theory of need for emotional support (see page 34 in the present
study), but the respondents also indicate the choice is a habit derived from greater social trust
in media.
The perception of the parish council’s knowledge and honesty can also be argued to
affecting the level of social trust. The public education carried out by the PDC is often
35
Yeh, mon. No problem
Fanny Hellsing
Stockholm University
directed to schoolchildren in St Elizabeth. Hence, the adult respondents of the present study
have little or no knowledge about the Parish Disaster Preparedness Office, though they are
well aware of the parish council in general. Neither do they have any suggestions what is
done at the office when there are no emergencies to handle. Instead, a majority of the
respondents contemptuously dismiss the employees at the parish council as idle, corrupt or
just unskilled. When I ask one of the respondents what she think is going in the office, she
describe it as follows:
“It’s a lot of times it doesn’t work. They just give to people and they don’t do it as
they should. They are the persons supposed to lay card on the table and display
them for you. But they just sit back. With the air conditioner. They should go to
the people and know they are comfortable!” (Respondent 9, 2011).
Important to note is that all respondents say they would accept tinned food distributed by
the parish council in times of emergencies. They would also go to a public emergency shelter
if they had to. This indicates some kind of social trust in the parish council. Still, the trust is
only expressed in matters related to emergency management – not at all when it comes to risk
communication and disaster preparedness.
7.1.4. Social trust in the national authorities
The respondents express a greater social trust in national authorities than in the parish council.
JIS and ODPEM are both national agencies associated with the government in Kingston. Both
produces risk- and crisis communication broadcast by Jamaican media. Even though the
respondents do not identify JIS or ODPEM as the sender of risk communication, they express
some social trust in these agencies. This trust seems to come from the respondents’
perceptions of ODPEM as operator in emergency management. Hence, the respondents
assume national authorities as quite reliable in crisis communication as well. This finding is
especially interesting since only one respondent can identify risk- or crisis communication
where ODPEM and JIS are the senders.
The differences of social trust in local versus national authorities might be explained by
the respondents’ expectations. As suggested before, social trust is constructed based on
expectations on a relationship (Cvetkovich & Löfstedt, 1999:5). The respondents express high
expectations on the parish council to show the population care and concern. The national
authorities on their hand are supposed to take care of the country as a whole. Even though the
36
Yeh, mon. No problem
Fanny Hellsing
Stockholm University
respondents say they understand that the parish council might have difficulties expressing
concern due to poor finances, this lack of care and concern is seen as a great betrayal. The
parish council is supposed to visit people, make sure they are comfortable and respond to
inquiries. Respondents who personally been denied emergency assistance are those who
express the greatest distrust. Some of them received assistance eventually, but they do not
consider the assistance sufficient enough, and so it is still perceived as a betrayal. The
respondent’s do not have the same expectations on the national authorities. Again, the level of
social trust can be explained by the receivers’ various expectations on the institutions
involved in the public risk communication.
7.2. Social trust affecting the respondents’ disaster preparedness
The model below illustrates how the respondent’s disaster preparedness is affected by the
absence of social trust in the Parish Disaster Preparedness Office. It is based on the findings
of the present study. Media reach the intended receiver with crisis communication. As a result
of this, the public rarely receives risk communication addressing latent- or possible risks.
Since the lack of risk communication significantly decreases the respondents’ ability to
predict and prepare natural disasters, this is a critical gap in Jamaican disaster preparedness.
37
Yeh, mon. No problem
Fanny Hellsing
Stockholm University
38
Yeh, mon. No problem
Fanny Hellsing
Stockholm University
7.3. Not an equilateral communication triangle
The communication triangle is not equilateral in Jamaica. The public entrust the
communicator more than the sender of risk communication. The following section will
address some concerns related to media’s prominent role in public risk communication.
First, media tend to focus on crisis communication. The public has to receive crisis
communication immediately for the message to be useful. Since Jamaica is a developing
country with frequent power cuts, the access to communication channels can be limited –
especially in times of emergencies. With this in mind, it is of great importance the public is
well informed and prepared before natural disasters appear.
Another aspect of media’s focus on crisis communication is what I, in the end of my stay
in the field, labeled the yeh mon- attitude. Only a few of the respondents applied any longterm disaster preparedness – and if they did, they were related to the respondent’s own
experiences in previous natural disasters. The absence of long-term disaster preparedness
cannot be explained by ignorance or lack of financial resources. Instead there is a widespread,
unfortunate belief that nothing can be done to lessen the consequences of natural disasters.
With a gesture of resignation the respondents said “There is nothing we can do to prepare, so
all I can do is to say ‘Yeh, mon. No problem.’”3. With media not addressing risk
communication, but only crisis communication – and media as the respondents’ only source
for external risk- and crisis communication – there is no wonder the ‘yeh, mon-attitude’ is
widespread among the respondents.
Media in Jamaica do not receive any public funding. Hence, they do not have a liability
to carry out public education. Instead, they are controlled by their own agenda and objectives.
All radio- and television stations have agreed to broadcast bulletins every sixth hours, but
nothing else is agreed upon. When searching the television- and radio tableaus, I found one
educational television show broadcast, except the bulletins. The show is broadcast once a
week and addresses the importance of hurricane preparedness. The broadcaster may very well
have good intentions, but broadcasting the show can also be seen from a commercial
perspective. Commercial breaks interrupt the show several times. In a striking number of the
commercials is the consumer encouraged to buy security equipment (emergency kit, hurricane
straps etcetera) and insurances. It is easier to promote possible- and immediate risks, than
latent risks. Hence, the focus on hurricanes in commercial media makes sense. This
3
‘Yeh, mon. No problem.’ is Jamaican English for “I will cross that bridge when I get to it”.
39
Yeh, mon. No problem
Fanny Hellsing
Stockholm University
argumentation is just speculations of media’s ulterior motives. Further research has to
examine media content and the producers’ motives. What can be said though, is that media is
not good enough as the public’s only source of risk communication as it creates a knowledge
gap in terms of long-term disaster preparedness. This is made evident with the respondent’s
knowledge gap in terms preparedness for possible- and latent risks.
8. Implications for increasing social trust in the local authorities
The population is not likely to reconsider its social trust in the local authorities as long as they
do not perceive the parish council as a member of the communication triangle. From a
perspective of public commitment and local governance, this is unfortunate.
Public education as in disaster preparedness in Jamaica raises deep concerns in previous
research (e.g. United Nations, 2007). The present study can confirm the concerns justified.
Today, the respondents’ disaster preparedness is limited to actions taken in immediate risks.
To increase the population’s ability to handle natural disasters, they have to enhance disaster
preparedness for possible risks as well. Though it is not certain an increased level of
knowledge would change the population’s risk behavior, it would at least provide the
population ability to reassess their personal risk behavior. The ability to do so in terms of
knowledge about natural disasters is what Jamaica is required to do according to the
Declaration of Bizkia (1999).
Since Jamaica signed the Declaration of Bizkaia, public education concerning natural
disasters are to be considered a matter for the political institutions in Jamaica. To increase
social trust in the authorities can also be said to make sense because it most likely would
benefit the efficiency of emergency management. In other words, evacuations and other
emergency procedures would become more efficient if the public cooperated with the parish
councils. Increasing the public’s general social trust in the Parish Disaster Preparedness
Office would most likely do this. Hence, focus in public risk communication has to be on how
to increase the (local) authorities’ credibility.
40
Yeh, mon. No problem
Fanny Hellsing
Stockholm University
8.1.1. Social media
An efficient way to establish social trust is for the public to be invited in a dialogue with the
authorities (see Kasperson, 1986; Trettin & Musham, 2000; Wray et al. 2006; Kapucu et al.,
2008). The findings in Jamaica do not fully support the theory of dialogue as a requirement
for social trust – but dialogue would still likely encourage a faithful relationship between the
parish council and the population it serves. Furthermore, the respondents seem to expect a
certain amount of dialogue when it comes to the local authorities, which is an important
insight when it comes to successful establishment of risk communication.
The St Elizabeth Parish Disaster Preparedness Office’s resources are limited in terms of
time and economy. Still, the PDC has to build social trust by becoming more visible to the
public. One inexpensive way to establish a dialogue would be social media. Social media is a
term for communication channels where the users create its content (Scott, 2010:38;
Hedenstierna, Luc & Olsson, 2011:103). Social media have in previous studies been proved to
encourage transparency, sender credibility and public discussions (Scott, 2010:38f; Andersson
& Wik Yeung, 2011:134).
St Elizabeth’s PDC already have a website on Facebook. However, the site has to become
more active and the PDC has to act as a visible moderator of it. The public can use the site to
report observations, send inquiries, asking questions. The PDC would have to spend some
time replying to the public, but it is also an opportunity for the Parish Disaster Preparedness
Office to send invitations and report from public education events. Whatever functions may
be implemented in the future, the purpose with a Facebook site would be for the public and
the PDC to have a dialogue. Today the social trust is harmed by the fact that the PDC does not
even respond to the respondents’ inquiries. The issue about social trust is not that the public
expect financial help from the parish council, but that the public does not feel recognized or
respected when the PDC do not respond to their inquiries. Therefore the opportunity to have a
dialogue has to be improved remarkable.
A Facebook site would be an opportunity for the PDC to establish a relationship with the
population she serves – but it is also a possibility for the public to meet and have a discussion
about matters all Jamaicans have to handle at some point, namely natural disasters. Such
initiative would probably be positive for the public perception of the parish council’s goodwill, openness, accessibility, and concern for the public safety.
41
Yeh, mon. No problem
Fanny Hellsing
Stockholm University
8.1.2. Media as a locomotive
Individuals are affected differently by the very same risk communication; they have different
experiences, beliefs and ability to process new information (Mileti & Fitzpatrick, 1991:20ff;
Hilhorst, 2003:40). To reach as many as possible, the parish council has to communicate with
a variety of channels and contexts.
Authorities often have an asymmetrical communication with the public (Klang, 2011:49).
It might not be necessary to change this, because the public expects nothing else from the
relationship. Although Jamaica is a ‘young’ nation with a high number of early adapters of
social media, additional risk communication has to be carried out through more ‘traditional’
channels.
Social trust is slowly gained, but it can disappear in a second (Slovic, 1993:678). Hence,
it might be a good idea for the PDC to cooperate with an already entrusted institution, namely
‘traditional’ media (i.e. local radio, television and newspapers). Reporters from the local
newspaper come by the Parish Disaster Preparedness Office from time to time, but often miss
Bradford-Britton is not prepared to answer their questions, and so the reporter’s is having a
hard time collecting information for the story. Instead of neglecting the reporters, the PDC
should ‘use’ local media to promote her work. To do that the PDC has to become pro-active.
By preparing answers in current matters, and perhaps even organize public events and
expositions, the PDC would invite the local media to report what the parish council is
currently up to. Natural disasters is a topic well suited for media dramaturgy, and local media
in Jamaica are very fond of reporting events where the public express commitment in political
matters. In other words, the Parish Disaster Preparedness Office has a golden opportunity to
establish a beneficial relationship with local media.
Public events would not only benefit the relationship between local authorities. It would
also be an opportunity to strengthen the relationship with the public. First, the event itself
would be an opportunity to strengthen the relationship between the public and its local
authorities. Second, public events would have positive side effects such as strengthen the
parish council as a caretaker for the public safety. Other possible side effects would be
openness and accessibility. The parish council would most likely gain social trust by giving
the employees at the parish council a face. Also important for the social trust is to inform the
public how to access those. In other words, above-mentioned implications are necessary for
the parish council’s future legitimacy, not least when it comes to public risk communication.
42
Yeh, mon. No problem
Fanny Hellsing
Stockholm University
9.
Final chapter
9.1. Concluding remarks
The findings describe how St Elizabeth Parish Council distributes risk information. Despite
these efforts, none of the respondents receive this information. Instead the respondents listen
to crisis communication broadcast in media. In terms of social trust, this means the
respondents express little or none social trust in the parish council’s risk communication. It
also shows that the respondents express a great social trust in media.
White (1945) stresses that his American respondents had a little interest in disaster
preparedness, as they perceived natural disasters an act of God. The findings in the present
study indicate a similar explanation. Media is entrusted to carry out crisis communication, but
the respondents somewhat overlook the importance of risk communication. By referring to
natural disasters as an act of God, they dismiss any attempts to encourage disaster
preparedness. This is an important aspect of public risk communication in Jamaica; as the
respondents’ general interest in risk communication is low, institutions carrying out risk
communication (i.e. the local authorities, not media) become less prominent in the public risk
communication. This finding provides the present study with two conclusions. First, religion
is a significant factor in natural disasters and social trust in risk communication related to
those. Religion is likely not as influential in risk communication regarding man-made
disasters, which means these two have to be clearly distinguished when examining social
trust. Second, the social trust has to be examined with a research method embracing a broad
spectrum of possible factors. Religion was not the first factor crossing my mind, but during
my stay in Jamaica it became obvious to me it played a major part in understanding the
respondents’ risk perceptions. Suggesting an open mind when examining social trust in risk
communication does not necessarily mean an ethnographic approach, or even a qualitative
approach, but risk perceptions and social trust are complex. Hence, the research method used
has to be open for what the respondents express as important for their risk perceptions.
The findings cannot tell if the social trust influences how the respondents receive a
message. However, the findings give evidence for social trust as important for the respondents
when they decide which sources they use for risk- and crisis communication. Because of a
low level of social trust in the local authorities, the respondents use media for crisis
communication. As a consequence of this behavior the respondents’ level of long-term
disaster preparedness is low. The absence of long-term disaster preparedness may have
43
Yeh, mon. No problem
Fanny Hellsing
Stockholm University
consequences for the respondents’ abilities to handle natural disasters; they cannot predict
what natural disaster that might occur and can therefore not make preparations in advance.
Hence, this study presents implications to strengthen the credibility of the institution most
likely to carry out this kind of risk communication, namely the parish council. The measures
are inspired by crisis communication and the concept of issues management. The purpose of
issues management is to gain (or regain) credibility and legitimacy by establishing a faithful
relationship before the crisis occurs (Grunig & Hunt, 1984:57; Cheney & Christensen,
2001:238). Issues management is usually applied within the field of public relations (Cheney
& Christensen, 2001:237f). However, the present study has argued issues management can be
applied within public risk communication as well.
Another significant theme in the findings is the matter of risk communication versus risk
information. The dialogue as mandatory for social trust in risk- and crisis communication is a
widely acknowledged theory (e.g. Keeney & von Winterfeldt, 1986; Warg, 2000; Trettin &
Musham, 2000; Breck, 2002:116; Wray et al., 2006). In St Elizabeth, the crisis
communication has been identified as media distributing risk information to the public. Since
the crisis communication is directed one-way, it shall be addressed as a kind of risk
information – not communication. According to previous studies, the respondents’ would then
express no social trust in media. This is not the case in St Elizabeth. In fact, the respondents
express a great social trust in media. Hence, the present study challenges the widely
acknowledged belief that social trust can only be built in a two-way information exchange.
Rather, the findings give evidence for Cvetkovich’s and Löfstedt’s theory (1999) of social
trust as identified by the receiver’s expectations. The absence of dialogue is not an issue for
social trust – as long as the receiver does not expect one to take place. Expectations can also
explain the respondents’ low level of trust in the parish council. The public expects a dialogue
to take place. Therefore is the absence of one perceived as a great betrayal – a betrayal with
consequences for the public’s social trust in the local authorities, and so for the parish
council’s legitimacy.
The relationship between social trust and expectations are significant for the research
field of social trust and risk communication. As mentioned before, it challenges a widespread
theory about dialogue as mandatory for social trust. It also gives evidence for the importance
of addressing various social institutions – also those who are not authorized by the
government to carry out public risk communication. Media in Jamaica is a non-governmental
institution with no political power (i.e. authorized by the government to carry out public risk
44
Yeh, mon. No problem
Fanny Hellsing
Stockholm University
communication). Still, they are to be considered very influential in the respondents’ risk
perceptions. They can therefore be said to have a kind of symbolic power in public risk
communication. Media’s importance in public risk communication has been acknowledged
before (e.g. Findahl, 2000; Beck, 1992). Yet, the research field of social trust in risk
communication has neglected the importance of actors with other kinds of power, such as
media (Mythen, 2004:94). Hence, to compare the receivers’ social trust in the sender versus
the communicator in Nordlund’s communication triangle, have provided some important
findings to the research field of social trust in risk communication.
9.2. Drawbacks of the applied method
According to Schrøder et al. (2003:48) should ethnographers be careful with generalizations
about the findings. The findings in the present study are a construction of data made by
seventeen respondents and me. Another ethnographer, meeting respondents in other situations
and period of times might come to other conclusions about the public risk communication in
Jamaica.
There is reason to believe the findings are strongly related to its geographical location,
namely St Elizabeth. ODPEM distribute guidelines to all the parish councils, but the PDC is
allowed to organize the public risk communication, as s/he consider suitable. The findings are
therefore strongly related to the parish of St Elizabeth and how miss Bradford-Britton chooses
to carry out her duties at the St Elizabeth Parish Disaster Preparedness Office. Hence, the
findings can under no circumstances be said to account for Jamaican risk communication in
general.
The strength of ethnography is data confirmed by multiple sources and methods
(Fetterman, 2010:52; Creswell, 2003:14). The limited period of time spent in the field can be
seen as a drawback in the present study. No immediate risks had to be handled during my stay
in Jamaica. Consequently no observations have been made on crisis communication. Instead,
the section addressing crisis communication and actual risk behavior are based only on
qualitative interviews.
The applied methods in the field allowed me to confirm data with follow-up questions
and even observations of actual behavior. The findings suggest a greater social trust in media
than in the parish council. The ethnographic approach also allowed me to examine possible
nuances and details in the public’s perceptions. The study is therefore valid from an
45
Yeh, mon. No problem
Fanny Hellsing
Stockholm University
ethnographic point of view. Yet, the selected methods are not able to tell us how much more
entrusted media are in comparison with the local authorities. Previous studies have made
attempts to measure social trust on a sliding scale (e.g. Slovic, Flynn & Layman, 1991;
Sjöberg, 2001; Powell & Lewis, 2008). Because the present study argue social trust being a
dynamic relationship, it is problematic to speak of social trust in terms of ‘non-existing’ or
even ‘low’, since both suggests social trust having a numerical value. To claim any
generalizations of how social trust affects public risk communication, the present study has to
be supplemented with research taking point of departure in other research methods.
9.3. Implications for further research
The applied methods in the present study enable any generalizations to be made concerning
public risk communication as a whole. Hence, future studies should also apply a quantitative
or strucutralist approach to immerse the scholarly understanding of public risk
communication in Jamaica.
The present study have addressed if social trust have an impact on public risk
communication. What not yet has been examined is why the social structures are constituted
as they are. Why is the respondents’ social trust in media greater than their social trust in the
parish council? The answer might as for example be found in a historical context; Jamaica is a
young nation and a former colony. Another possible explanation is the economical aspect;
Jamaica is a developing country with a widespread corruption. 25 percent of the population
says they have been proposed with a corrupt proposal from state employees (Powell & Lewis
2008:49). As these approaches are only assumption, future studies have to examine how
social structures and cultural contexts affect public risk communication in Jamaica.
To make generalizations, research has to be carried out in other parishes as well. Though,
it is not only the geographical aspect of it – but also a socioeconomic. Jamaica is a developing
country with distinct social and economical inequalities among the population. The present
study has addressed a selection of respondents from different socio-economic groups. Future
studies have to examine differences between these groups.
Present study emphasized media’s prominent role in public risk- and crisis
communication. As a result of this, it is necessary to further explore this issue. In order to gain
a holistic understanding, media content and its producers have to be put in the limelight.
Questions as why media choose crisis communication instead of risk communication cannot
46
Yeh, mon. No problem
Fanny Hellsing
Stockholm University
be answered within the frames of the present study. Hence, this has to be addressed in forthcoming research.
The above-mentioned implications for future research all aims at increasing the
knowledge regarding public risk- and crisis communication in Jamaica. The findings and
implications in the present study are however not only interesting for Jamaica, but also for the
research field of risk communication. The measures are inspired by how credibility is
constructed in public relations and other areas of crisis communication. Hence, future studies
have to examine if and how the suggested measures are successful in public risk
communication concerning natural disasters.
Another important matter in future studies is the issue of dialogue. Today, a majority of
the influential scholars in the field of risk communication argue for dialogue as a precondition
to build social trust (Breck, 2002:116f). The present study is to some extent influenced by this
theory; the measures are suggested to create an active public. Yet, the findings do not give
evidence for the necessity to have a dialogue. In fact, the respondent’s express the greatest
social trust in an institution carrying out one-way information. In other words, the present
study highlights a very unfortunate assumption within its research field. If institutions
carrying out one-way risk information are considered irrelevant for studies of social trust,
traditional media are to be considered irrelevant in risk- and crisis communication. To make
such assumption is very unfortunate; media are, to say the least, an important actor in riskand crisis communication in Jamaica. Hence, the present study gives evidence for the
importance of continuously and open-minded examine social trust as a factor in all processes
where risk information is communicated – regardless if it is considered to be risk
communication or risk information.
47
Yeh, mon. No problem
Fanny Hellsing
Stockholm University
10. References
Andersson, Anna and Wik Yeung, Malou (2011): “Från jord till bord med cyberord – om
sociala medier i en traditionell bransch” in Sociala? Medier? En antologi om en ny tid, (ed.)
Michael Nilsson. Malmö: Manifesto.
Beck, Ulrich (1992): Risk Society. Towards a New Modernity. London: Sage Publications.
Blumer, Herbert (1969): Symbolic Interactionism. Perspective and Method. Englewood
Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.
Bord, Richard and O’Connor, Robert (1990): “Risk communication, knowledge and attitudes.
Explaining reactions to a technology perceived as risky” in Risk Analysis, vol. 10, pp. 499506.
Breck, Thomas (2002): Riskkommunikation. Dialog om det osäkra. Stockholm: Natur och
Kultur.
Burns, Robin and Sullivan, Peter (2000): “Perceptions of Danger, Risk Taking, and Outcomes
in a Remote Community” in Environment and Behavior, vol. 32, pp. 32-71.
Cheney, George and Christensen, Lars Thøger (2001): “Organizational Identity. Linkages
Between Internal and External Communication” in The New Handbook of Organizational
Communication. Advances in Theory, Research, and Methods (eds.) Jablin, F. and Putnam, L.
Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Cox, Robert (2010): Environmental Communication and the Public Sphere. 2nd edition.
California: Thousand Oaks/Sage Publications.
Creswell, John (2003): Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Methods Approaches. California:
Thousand Oaks/Sage Publications.
Cvetkovich, George (1999): “The Attribution of Social Trust” in Social Trust and the
Management of Risk, (eds.) Cvetkovich, G. and Löfstedt, R. London: Earthscan Publications
Ltd.
Cvetkovich, George and Löfstedt, Ragnar (1999): “Social Trust and Culture in Risk
Management” in Social Trust and the Management of Risk, (eds.) Cvetkovich, G. and
Löfstedt, R. London: Earthscan Publications Ltd.
Douglas, Mary and Wildavsky, Aaron (1982): Risk and Culture. An Essay on the Selection of
Technological and Environmental Dangers. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Earle, Timothy and Cvetkovich, George (1995): Social Trust. Towards a Cosmopolitan
Society. Westport: Greenwood Press.
Fetterman, David (2010): Ethnography. Step-by-step. London: Sage.
48
Yeh, mon. No problem
Fanny Hellsing
Stockholm University
Findahl, Olle (2000): “Kan vi lita på medierna?” in Risker, kommunikation och medier. En
forskarantologi. (eds.) Lidskog, R., Nohrstedt, S.A., and Warg, L-E. Lund: Studentlitteratur.
Flick, Uwe (2006): An Introduction to Qualitative Research. 3rd ed. London: Sage.
George, Vincent (2008): “The Reaction of Consumers to Low-Income Dwellings” in On
Housing volume 4, (ed.) George, V. Kingston: Corporate Service Division of the National
Housing Trust.
Grabill, Jeffrey and Simmons, Michele (1998): ”Toward a Critical Rhetoric of Risk
Communication. Procuring Citizens and the Role of Technical Communicators” in Technical
Communication Quarterly, vol. 7, pp. 415-41.
Grunig, James and Hunt, Todd (1984): Managing public relations. New York : Holt, Rinehart
& Winston.
Hamilton, Jennifer (2003): ”Exploring Technical and Cultural Appeals in Strategic Risk
Communication. The Fernald Radium Case” in Risk Analysis, vol. 23, pp. 291-302.
Hedenstierna, Amelie/ Luc, Isabelle/ Olsson, Camilla (2011): “Från monolog till dialog. Ett
internt marknadsföringsperspektiv” in Sociala? Medier? En antologi om en ny tid, (ed.)
Michael Nilsson. Malmö: Manifesto.
Hilhorst, Dorothea (2003): “Responding to Disasers. Diversity of Bureaucrats, Technocrats
and Local People” in International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters, vol. 21, pp.
37-56.
Isaacs, Dian (2008): ”NHT’s Peril Insurance Claims Experience 2004-07” in On Housing
volume 4, (ed.) George, V. Kingston: Corporate Service Division of the National Housing
Trust.
Jamaica Amateur Radio Association (2005): Disaster Preparedness Plan. Kingston: ODPEM.
Jarlbro, Gunilla (1993): Krisinformation ur ett medborgarperspektiv. En kunskapsöversikt.
Stockholm: Psykologiskt Försvar.
Jorgensen, Danny (1989): Participant Observation. A Methodology of Human Studies.
London: Sage.
Kapucu, Naim/ Berman, Evan/ Hu Wang, Xiao (2008): ”Emergency Information
Management and Public Disaster Preparedness. Lessons from the 2004 Florida Hurricane
Season” in International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters, vol. 26, pp. 169-96.
Kasperson, Roger (1986): ”Six Propositions on Public Participation and Their Relevance for
Risk Communication” in Risk Analysis, vol. 6, pp. 267-87.
49
Yeh, mon. No problem
Fanny Hellsing
Stockholm University
Kasperson, Roger (1992): “The Social Amplification of Risk. Progress in Developing an
Integrative Framework” in Social Theories of Risk, (eds.) Krimsky, S., and Golding, D.,
Westport: Praeger Publishers/Greenwood.
Keeney, Ralph and von Winterfeldt, Detlof (1986): “Improving Risk Communication” in Risk
Analysis, vol. 6, pp. 417-424.
Klang, Mathias (2011): “Social media och staten” in Sociala? Medier? En antologi om en ny
tid, (ed.) Michael Nilsson. Malmö: Manifesto.
Krimsky, Sheldon and Plough, Alonzo (1987): Environmental Hazards. Communicating
Risks as a Social Process. Dover: Auburn House.
Lave, Tamara and Lave, Lester (1991): “Public Perception of Risks of Floods. Implications
for Communication” in Risk Analysis, vol. 11, pp. 255-67.
LeCompte, Margaret and Goetz, Judith (1982): “Problems of Reliability and Validity in
Ethnographic Research” in Review of Educational Research, vol. 52, pp. 31-60.
Lowe, Damien (2009): Black River. St Elizabeth. A report published by Social Development
Commission in St Elizabeth, Jamaica.
Löfstedt, Ragnar (2000): “Samhällsvetenskaplig riskforskning. En kort historik” in Risker,
kommunikation och medier. En forskarantologi, (eds.) Lidskog, Rolf/ Nohrstedt, Stig Arne
and Warg, Lars-Erik. Lund: Studentlitteratur.
Mileti, Dennis and Fitzpatrick, Colleen (1991): “Communication of Public Risk. Its Theory
and Its Application” in Sociological Practice Review, vol. 2, pp. 20-28.
Mythen, Gabe (2004) Ulrich Beck. A Critical Introduction to the Risk Society. London: Pluto
Press.
National Hurricane Center (2011):
http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/general/lib/lib1/nhclib/mwreviews/mwreviews.html, accessed
2011-05-03.
Nordlund, Roland (2000): “Risk- och kriskommunikation. Myndigheter – medier –
medborgare. Att fördjupa och bredda ett forskningsfält” in Risker, kommunikation och
medier. En forskarantologi. (eds.) Lidskog, R., Nohrstedt, S.A., and Warg, L-E. Lund:
Studentlitteratur.
ODPEM (1997): National Disaster Action Plan for Jamaica. Kingston: Office for Disaster
Preparedness and Emergency Management.
Available at www.mona.uwi.edu/cardin/virtual_library/docs/1109/1109.pdf, accessed 201104-11.
50
Yeh, mon. No problem
Fanny Hellsing
Stockholm University
Otway, Harry (1992): “Public Wisdom, Expert Fallibility. Toward a Contextual Theory of
Risk” in Social Theories of Risk, (eds.) Krimsky, S., and Golding, D., Westport: Praeger
Publishers/Greenwood
Perez-Lugo, Maria (2004): “Media Uses in Disaster Situations. A New Focus on the Impact
Phase” in Sociological Inquiry, vol. 74, pp. 210-225.
Peters, Richard/ Covello, Vincent/ McCallum, David (1997): “The Determinants of Trust and
Credibility in Environmental Risk Communication. An Empirical Study” in Risk Analysis,
vol. 17, pp. 43-54.
Pijawka David and Mushtakel Alvin (1991/1992): “Public Opposition to the Siting of the
High-level Nuclear Waste Repository. The Importance of Trust”. Policy Studies Review, vol.
10, pp. 180-194.
Planning Institute of Jamaica (2009): Vision 2030 Jamaica. National Development Plan.
Kingston: Pear Tree Press.
Powell, Lawrence and Lewis, Balford (2008): The Political Culture of Democracy in
Jamaica. The Impact of Governance. Tennessee: Vanderbilt University.
Rowan, Katherine (1991): “Goals, Obstacles, and Strategies in Risk Communication. A
Problem-Solving Approach to Improving Communication About Risks” in Journal of Applied
Communication Research, vol. 19, pp. 300-29.
Rubin, Herbert and Rubin, Irene (2005): Qualitative Interviewing. The Art of Hearing Data.
Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Scott, David Meerman (2010): New Rules of Marketing and PR. How to Use Social Media,
Blogs, News Releases, Online Video, and Viral Marketing to Reach Buyers Directly. New
York: John Wiley & Sons.
Schrøder, Kim/ Murray, Catherine/ Drotner, Kirsten/ Kline, Steve (2003): Researching
Audiences. A Practical Guide to Methods in Media Audience Analysis. London: Bloomsbury
Publishing Plc.
Sjöberg, Lennart (1999): “Risk Perception in Europe” in Ambio, vol. 28, pp. 543-49.
Sjöberg, Lennart (2001): “Limits of Knowledge and the Limited Importance of Trust” in Risk
Analysis, vol. 21, pp. 189-98.
Slovic, Paul (1986): “Informing and Educating the Public about Risk” in Risk Analysis, vol. 6,
pp. 403-15.
Slovic, Paul/ MacGregor, Donald/ Kraus, Nancy (1987): “Perception of Risk from
Automobile Safety Defects” in Accident Analysis & Prevention, vol. 19, pp. 359-73.
Slovic, Paul (1987): “Perception of Risk” in Science, vol. 236, pp. 280-85.
51
Yeh, mon. No problem
Fanny Hellsing
Stockholm University
Slovic, Paul/ Flynn, James/ Layman, Mark (1991): “Perceived Risk, Trust and the Politics of
Nuclear Waste” in Science, vol. 254, pp. 1603-07.
Slovic, Paul (1993): “Perceived Risk, Trust and Democracy” in Risk Analysis, vol. 13, pp.
675-82.
Slovic, Paul (1997): “Trust, Emotion, Sex, Politics and Science. Surveying the Riskassessment Battlefield” in Environment, Ethics and Behavior, (eds.) Bazerman, M., Messick,
D., Tenbrunsel, A., Wade-Benzoni, K. San Francisco: New Lexington Press.
Slovic, Paul (2000): The Perception of Risk. London: Earthscan Publications Ltd.
Spradley, James (1979): Ethnographic Interviews. New York: Holt.
Spradley, James (1980): Participant Observations. New York: Holt.
St Elizabeth Disaster Committee (1999): Parish Disaster Plan. Black River: St Elizabeth
Parish Council.
Stewart, Stacy (2005): Tropical Cyclone Report. Hurricane Ivan. 2-24 September 2004.
Miami: National Hurricane Center.
Thomas, Polly and Vaitlingam, Adam (2007): The Rough Guide to Jamaica. 3rd ed. London:
Rough Guides.
Thompson, John (1995): The Media and Modernity. A Social Theory of Media. Stanford:
Stanford University Press.
Trettin, Lillian and Musham, Catherine (2000): “Is Trust a Realistic Goal in Risk
Communication?” in Environment and Behavior, vol. 32, pp. 419-26.
United Nations (1999): Declaration of Bizkaia on the Right to the Environment. A report
published by UNESCO and United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights after the
International Seminar held in Bilbao, Spain, from 10th to 13th of February 1999. Available at
www.unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0011/001173/117321e.pdf, accessed 2011-05-23.
United Nations (2007): Information on Disaster Risk Management. Case Study of Five
Countries. Jamaica. New York: United Nations and Inter-American Development Bank.
Disaster Risk Management Project. Case Study: Jamaica. Washington D.C: The World Bank
United Nations (2010): “Human Development Index and Its Components” in Human
Development Report 2010 by United Nations Development Programme.
Available at http://hdr.undp.org/en/reports/global/hdr2010/chapters/en/, accessed 2011-03-09.
Warg, Lars-Erik (2000): “Tillit och trovärdighet i riskkommunikation” in Risker,
kommunikation och medier. En forskarantologi”, (eds.) Lidskog, R., Nohrstedt, S.A., and
Warg, L-E. Lund: Studentlitteratur.
52
Yeh, mon. No problem
Fanny Hellsing
Stockholm University
Wray, Ricardo/ Rivers, Jennifer/ Jupka, Keri/ Clements, Bruce (2006): “Public Perceptions
about Trust in Emergency Risk Communication. Qualitative Research Findings” in
International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters, vol. 24, pp. 45-76.
White, Gilbert (1945): Human Adjustment to Floods. Dissertation at Department of
Geography, University of Chicago.
Young, Simon (2008): “Catastrophe Insurance for housing in the Development World. A
NHT perspective” in On Housing volume 4, (ed.) George, V. Kingston: Corporate Service
Division of the National Housing Trust.
Interviews
Bradford-Britton, Renée (2011): Expert Interview with Renée Bradford-Britton, Parish
Disaster Coordinator at St Elizabeth Parish Disaster Preparedness Office. Interview in Black
River, Jamaica, by Fanny Hellsing, 15th of March 2011.
Doctor, Sheila (2011): Expert Interview with Sheila Doctor, Head of St Elizabeth Red Cross,
Interview in Santa Cruz, Jamaica, by Fanny Hellsing, 29th of March 2011.
Gordon, André (2011): Expert Interview with André Gordon, journalist at The Gleaner.
Interview in Black River, Jamaica, by Fanny Hellsing, 29th of March 2011
Ranglin, Owen (2011): Expert Interview with Sergeant Owen Ranglin, Fire Prevention
Officer at Black River Fire Brigade. Interview in Black River, Jamaica, by Fanny Hellsing,
15th of February 2011.
Respondent 1 (2011): Ethnographic Interview 1. Interview in Black River, Jamaica, by Fanny
Hellsing, 20th of February 2011.
Respondent 2 (2011): Ethnographic Interview 2. Interview in Accompong, Jamaica, by Fanny
Hellsing, 12th of March 2011.
Respondent 3 (2011): Ethnographic Interview 3. Interview in Accompong, Jamaica, by Fanny
Hellsing, 14th of March 2011.
Respondent 4 (2011): Ethnographic Interview 4. Interview in Accompong, Jamaica, by Fanny
Hellsing, 16th of March 2011.
Respondent 5 (2011): Ethnographic Interview 5. Interview in Balaclava, Jamaica, by Fanny
Hellsing, 18th of March 2011.
Respondent 6 (2011): Ethnographic Interview 6. Interview in Balaclava, Jamaica, by Fanny
Hellsing, 20th of March 2011.
Respondent 7 (2011): Ethnographic Interview 7. Interview in Black River, Jamaica, by Fanny
Hellsing, 24th of March 2011.
53
Yeh, mon. No problem
Fanny Hellsing
Stockholm University
Respondent 8 (2011): Ethnographic Interview 8. Interview in Black River, Jamaica, by Fanny
Hellsing, 25th of March 2011.
Respondent 9 (2011): Ethnographic Interview 9. Interview in Black River, Jamaica, by Fanny
Hellsing, 26th of March 2011.
Respondent 10 (2011): Ethnographic Interview 10. Interview in Black River, Jamaica, by
Fanny Hellsing, 28th of March 2011.
Taylor, Shane (2011): Expert Interview with Shane Taylor, Planner at St Elizabeth Parish
Council. Interview in Black River, Jamaica, by Fanny Hellsing, 19th of February 2011.
54
Yeh, mon. No problem
Fanny Hellsing
Stockholm University
11. Appendix 1 – Respondents in the ethnographic interviews
Respondent
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Gender
Female
Male
Female
Male
Female
Male
Female
Male
Female
Female
Age
49
64
40
40
59
55
65
51
53
42
Occupation
Comm. farmer
Farmer
Shop owner
Principle
Farmer
Farmer
Retired
Comm. farmer
Maid
Employed
Education
High school
Illiterate
A-level
University
Illiterate
High school
A-level
High school
High school
University
Hometown
Aberdeen
Accompong
Accompong
Accompong
Balaclava
Balaclava
Black River
Black River
Black River
Black River
S-Ec. group
Middle
Poor
Middle
Upper
Poor
Poor
Upper
Middle
Middle
Upper
Socio-economic groups:
Poor – the respondent are not able to support for herself.
Middle – the respondent are dependent on an employment to support for herself.
Upper – the respondent are not dependent on any employment to support for herself.
The classification was made by the Social Development Commission (see Lowe 2009). The table is
based on the information the respondents gave in the interviews.
55
Yeh, mon. No problem
Fanny Hellsing
Stockholm University
12. Appendix 2 – Guide for the expert interviews
‐
‐
Name
Workplace and title
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
Can you describe St Elizabeth in general terms? (Wealthy, rural or particular problems).
Are natural disasters a big concern in St Elizabeth/Jamaica?
How do your workplace work with disaster preparedness?
Do you have legal responsibility?
Do you work with preparedness, mitigation or management?
Does the work vary according to seasons (management/preparedness)?
Individual or group sessions?
Which channels do you use? Why?
Do you corporate with other institutions? (NGO’s, PDC etc.).
Can people contact you in case they need help, or is that the parish council/poor relief/PDC?
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
Can consequences of natural disasters be avoided with knowledge and preparation?
Are people in general prepared how to behave in case of emergencies?
Are they prepared, scared or think they can do anything about it?
How do they get the information?
Is there a difference between different kinds of disasters (hurricanes and earthquakes)?
Do people in general get enough information about how to behave during – and mitigate the
consequences of a natural disaster?
What else can be done?
Are poor people more exposed to disaster preparedness?
Is there a geographical difference in disaster preparedness?
Are people receptive of disaster preparedness? Do they listen and act according to the
information?
What is the main reason why people are harmed of natural disasters?
‐
‐
‐
Does media play an important role in the disaster preparedness?
Are there any particular channels that work better than others?
In your opinion, does the bulletins work?
‐
‐
‐
‐
56
Yeh, mon. No problem
Fanny Hellsing
Stockholm University
13. Appendix 3 – Guide for the ethnographic interviews
-
What is your name?
Where do you live?
What is your occupation?
What is your family status?
-
Can you describe what kind of natural disasters you are exposed to?
Do you think there is anything you can do to prevent or mitigate a natural disaster?
Have you ever experienced a natural disaster?
Did you know that could happen to you?
How did you identify the natural disaster?
How did you react? Were you afraid?
Did you stay home during the natural disaster? Did you know where to go?
Did you hear any official information during the disaster?
What made you decide it was safe to go back home?
Did you need any help from friends, family or institutions after the disaster?
Did you try to get more information about natural disasters after this event? From whom?
Did you change your behavior after the natural disaster?
-
Do you think about natural disasters in your daily life?
Do you take actions to be prepared for natural disasters?
Do you know…
…when the hurricane season is?
…where your nearest public emergency shelter is?
…what is in an emergency kit?
Do you have an emergency kit, water tank or food supplies at home?
Do you and your family ever talk about natural disasters?
Do you trust the bulletins more than you trust what you see with your own eyes?
-
If you needed help during a natural disaster, whom would you contact?
Would you call the fire brigade, police, parish council or the Red Cross?
Would you go to a public emergency shelter instead of friends and family?
Is there help you can get at a public emergency shelter that you cannot get from friends and
family?
-
Do you know if the parish council has any information or materials for you in case of
emergencies?
In what situation would you contact them?
Have you ever experienced their assistance?
Have you ever met the Parish Disaster Coordinator?
Have you participated in an emergency drill or other session with the PDC?
Do you know how to get in contact with the PDC?
Do you think the parish council would assist you if you asked for it?
Is the parish council doing its best to help you?
Is it a matter of lack of resources or that they don’t use it properly?
What can the parish council do to make you feel better prepared for natural disasters?
Are you dependent on the parish council to feel prepared for natural disasters? Who else
would you rely on?
-
57